|
09-27-2006, 03:26 AM
|
#41 | |||||||
|
Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 143
|
Quote:
Yes whose indweller is Narayana, but who himself every yuga Rudra is also in the heart of Narayana. The atma of Narayana (!) Quote:
Lord of Lords. Yes Maheswara is the DevaDeve - Lord of the Lords, not a -demi-God! But Lord of the demiGods. Similarly, when Vishnu is worshipped, Shiva is worshipped in his heart too. Shiva states this clearly because the same Maheswara is ever in Vishnu's heart and is the Paramatma and ParBrahm. Quote:
No problem with that. Quote:
YES this is important. BUT it is both ways. Narayan the indweller of Rudra and Rudra the indweller of Narayana! This is the truth Raghu. See it. Quote:
Quote:
This is not a simple quote. And not to be understood simply. It points to the same line as ahambrahmasmi. Which again has been laughed upon by the davatins, the hare krishnas etc. This speaks about the level of closeness of Shiva and Vishnu. But you are able to focus only on the Vishnu part even here. Vishnu worships himself while worshipping Rudra, because he sees no difference between the two. He sees himself as one with Rudra. What happens to the God positioning agenda here? Trash it. Also many times I hear dvaitins say oh Krishna worshipped Shiva to show through his example. But hardly any Hari bhakta follows that example. I enjoy worshipping Hari. Quote:
All this is true. But the problem is that you are trying to separate Vishnu from Shiva and perch one above the other on a shelf and give them three or five stars. The quotes you pasted here clearly state on the closeness of Vishnu and Shiva. Both are in each other's heart always. Inseperable. And they both worship each other. Vishnu doesn't worship for boons, but worships Shiva for a thousand years and gets Sudarshan Chakra as a boon. Shiva says I create as Brahma, sustain as Vishnu and destroy as Rudra. Vishnu accepts this in Padma Purana. Here Vishnu says similar thing. Does this still ring any bells? If it still doesn't, then sorry. Vishnu is Supreme. I have no doubt about this. Shiva is Supreme, I have no doubt about this either. You can quote another volume, so can I. But this is the conclusion. I am not interested in perching my self above you. What's the use? I accept both as equal. Now all matters is my personal sadhna. There has to be a conclusion for me. I can't move with Dualism. One has to rise above dualism and see the universe as His manifested shakti. He is in everything and is the cause of everything. I call him Shiva. You can call him Vishnu. That is not the point. The point is again, where do I stand and what is my status. How can I rise above this. And that is what matters my friend. I have no powers to decide on the positions of Gods. I still have to reach them to see it. Mantra heenam, kriya heenam, bhakti heenam sureshwara, yat pujitam maya deve, paripurnam tadastu mev! Om Namah Shivaya. |
|||||||
|
|
|
09-27-2006, 03:33 AM
|
#42 |
|
Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 143
|
Advaita is False?
You follow Dvaita so Advaita for you is false. You can state one path false, if it leads nowhere or does not lead to the target destination. If that was the case, then there wouldn't have been any Rishis following that path. Advaita wouldn't have produced so many great Rishis. If Advaita was all that false, why would Vishvambar Mishra go to one after the other to two advaita Gurus from Shankaracharya lineage for knowledge and initiation? Even though he seemed to preach dvaita philosophy? Last edited by Yogkriya : 09-27-2006 at 04:55 AM. |
|
|
|
|
09-27-2006, 03:50 AM
|
#43 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 143
|
Quote:
That is path of Yoga. Which you can't follow nor understand. It is not a path of arguments to start with. It is Vedic. Again, you don't seem to understand, because you want proof from scriptures. The proof I have given is not enough for you. You can reject parts of Mahabharata all you want because some are not matching your srutis. If you read Anushasana Prava again, dozens of Rishis come to Krishna and state their experience in realization of Shiva. Now according to you they all shoudl differ! But they all state similar experience. It is for the blind lost in dualism who find it all different. Like the blind touching the elephant found it different. If fire burns your hand, or water wets your hand, it is the truth. And upon experincing, this will be the same experience for all. You don't always need a book to prove it. Universal truths are the same when experiences. It is not speculation arising from arrogance or ego. For you can't rise in Yog if you are following arrogance and ego and that is the litmus test. Further more you can't rise in yoga without a sadguru. Who himself is a realized soul. I understand what you mean by reading scriptures and repeating what is there. It is all there already! Anyone can read it. But without realization, it means nothing. Until and unless you realize it, until and unless you come face to face with facts, not just by reading them, they still remain unrealized by YOU. You have to realized them after reading and believing what is written in the Vedas. Certainely I accept the Vedas and consider them as a guide. Lord says I'm in the heart of every one. You believe that. But you can still get annoyed with others or feel enimosity towards them. Can you actually see the Lord? That is the question. Yes Vedas give the truth, but unless you realize it... follow your own logic dude. As far as chaos called Hinduism is concerned, then I can name the chaos Dvait and Gaudiya organizations are into today. All are divided because can't agree over simple issues, have sprouted out different branches and have issues, enimosity, hatred and jealousy (like who made more money from sale of books and who is making more disciples etc). Let's not get in to that. Last edited by Yogkriya : 09-27-2006 at 04:41 AM. |
|
|
|
|
|
09-27-2006, 01:25 PM
|
#44 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 189
|
Quote:
Cite the verse and the context fully and we will see. Hi Raghu Pandit. I have always admired your brilliant logic. As per you EKO RUDRO DVITTIYA NA TASHTHU refers to Narayana alone. I agree. So, Narayana must be sinful since He was alone. He gave birth to Brahma from whom sinful Rudra was born. Sin cannot come from nothing. (And I also keep wondering how a child came to know that it was sinful? Ha. Ha) And Raghu yoy are just an intolerant hindu whom hinduism can do without, since who needs moslems and christians when hindus like you are around. You have not seen RV10.061.05 (Rudra), the benefactor of man, whose eager, virile energy was developed, drew it back when disseminated (for the generation of offfspring); again the irresistible (Rudra) concentrates (the energy) which was communicated to his maiden daughter. RV 10.061.06 When the deed was done in mid-heaven in the proximity of the father working his will, and the daughter coming together, they let the seed fall slightly; it was poured upon the high place of sacrifice. RV 10.061.07 When the father united with the daughter, then associating with the earth, he sprinkled it with the effusion; then the thoughtful gods begot Brahma; they fabricated the lord of the hearth (of sacrifice); the defender of sacred rites Brahma is a mental concept of Devas and so is Brahmanspati. There is none other than one EKO RUDRA who is thousand headed Purusha, Narayana and who is father of Hiryanagarbha. He is the father, the daughter, and the son. And if you think Vishnu is Narayana then see this: Rig Veda 9 saem>? pvte jin/ta m?tI/na< j?in/ta id/vae j?in/ta p&?iw/Vya> , Raghu you are a thankless fellow not by your own choice but since you are blinded by gunas. Shiva is supreme sacrifice. It is because of auspiciousness that the universe and you exist. All exist since Shiva drinks the poison of samsara. It is because of bliss soma that we have any reason to exist. You will know the truth as given below but surely with pain. Svet. Up, 4.18 yadaa.atamastaanna divaa na raatriH na sannachaasachchhiva eva kevalaH . tadaxara.n tat.h saviturvareNyaM praGYaa cha tasmaat.h prasR^itaa puraaNii .. 18 4.18. When the light has risen, there is no day, no night, neither existence nor non-existence; Siva (the blessed) alone is there. That is the eternal, the adorable light of Savitri, - and the ancient praGYaa proceeded thence. 6.7 tamiishvaraaNaaM paramaM maheshvara.n ta.n devataanaaM parama.n cha daivatam.h . patiM patiinaaM paramaM parastaad.h\- vidaama devaM bhuvaneshamiiDyam.h .. 7.. 6.7 WE WILL KNOW THIS MIGHTIEST ONE WHO IS FAR ABOVE ALL THE MIGHTY – THIS SUMMIT OF THE GODS AND THEIR GODHEAD, KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS, WHO TOWERETH HIGH ABOVE ALL SUMMIT AND GREATNESSES. LET US LEARN OF GOD FOR HE IS THIS UNIVERSES' MASTER AND ALL SHALL ADORE HIM. You may show us one shruti where any other diety is said to be param Parastad. |
|
|
|
|
|
09-27-2006, 06:32 PM
|
#45 | ||
|
Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: USA
Posts: 487
|
Quote:
Whio cares about your faulty and wrong opinions ? The verses are clear that Lord Narayana aka Shri Krishna is the Soul of Universe. As per Shatapatha Brahamana, Shiva is not. Quote:
Aham Brahmasmi is said by Brahman here and in Upanishads. This is a separate issue. Still you cannot explain or accpet the Shatapatha Brahmana verses where Lord Rudra himself says that he is sinful(anapahatapaapma). Can you ? You cannot, because there truth is very explicit unlike diametrically opposed to your fallacious premise. |
||
|
|
|
|
09-27-2006, 06:35 PM
|
#46 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: USA
Posts: 487
|
Quote:
All your claims are yours alone. Whether something is vedic or not, one has to know by reading Vedas. Advaita is the most anti-Vedic teaching, in the sense it is daimetrically opposed to Vedic teaching. As for Yoga, it is a process taught in Vedas, tha requires the right knowledge to accompany that process. Without that right knowledge from study of Vedas, whatever you do is a waste of your time. |
|
|
|
|
|
09-27-2006, 06:42 PM
|
#47 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: USA
Posts: 487
|
Quote:
I think you can understand better if you read my entire arguments properly. I cannot teach you like a kid. I think you are old enough and capable of thinking by yourself. Please read my posts very carefully and fully. This is not what I concluded as you allude. My point was based on Shatapatha Brahmana verses, which very clearly states that Lord BrahmA gave birth to RudrA. Hence Svetasvatara Upanishad points to Lord Narayana by the word RudrA. In Svetasvatara it does not refer to Umapati by the word RudrA but to Narayana only. There are indications. One point is giving birth to BrahmA, possessing thousands of parts etc. One may ask why Narayana is mentioned as RudrA. The answer is in Bhallaveya Sruti and Visvakarma SuktA. I have explained this logically more than 3 times. Is this so difficult to understand as opposed to be accepted ? Atanu, I am sure you are not that incapable. No point in beating around the bush. If you have the honesty and courage, face the truth as stated in Vedas. If one interprets as you do, then one will also have to come to the conclusion that Vedas state contradictory things and that Brahman is anapahatapaapma(This is not my conclusion, it is yours). |
|
|
|
|
|
09-28-2006, 01:32 AM
|
#48 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 143
|
Quote:
You can push and huff quoting Shatapatha Brahamana, but LORD SHIVA ain't coming down to the gaudiya demi-God level. Sad for you, but so true. Why don't you read Rudra Upanishad to know Rudra? I can't read the biography of Nelson Mandela to know about Mahatma Gandhi! Maybe add Markandey Puran to your library too. Demi-God for one, is just one of the few terms invented in the neo-krishnaism (just like "Supreme Personality of Godhead", etc). You read a verse, but lack understanding to comprehend it. You cannot come to a conclusion just by reading one text. If people had to believe your stupid assumption of Shiva being just a sinful being, then all the Shiva temples will have to close down, did Rama simply wasted his time worshiping Shiva? and Krishna who because of Shiva's mercy became the Soul of the Universe, really had no business worshipping him in the first place? It is not what you think. And I'm not going to try drag you out of your one track mind. Stay there. You look good in your own place. I asked you to explain Anushasana parva and you totally failed to do so and dismissed it by saying it as false since it does not agree with a few verses from your shruti. You also failed to show us one shruti where any other diety is said to be param Parastad. You further said it is concocted!! By whom? You are trying to apply these rules, but do not have a proper understanding of the spirit behind them. Your spirit of understanding this is coming from Gaudiya literature. And as we all know, Gaudiyas have never been any authority on explaining Lord Shiva. Srila Prabhupda did try by giving some milk and curd example though. And the right spirit in understanding Shiva is something that comes because of mercy from a higher source. Sorry man, bookish reading and cramming doesn't always help here. It can make you a scholar, but not a siddha. And without siddhi, your knowledge remains a theory alone. You can talk and talk about swimming, but you are not a swimmer. Now, in your enthusiasm to vociferate against Shiva's high position, you are contradicting your own self. The logic you presented is foolish. If Shiva/Rudra is sinful, then by applying your logic - so is Vishnu/aka Krishna. Since Shiva keeps Vishnu in his heart always. And Vishnu/Krishna bows down to himself in Shiva's heart. How can Shiva keep Vishnu in his heart and keep meditating on him for yuga's after yuga's and still be sinful?? Or maybe he's washed off some of the sins by now? In that case every Krishna bhakta will ever remain sinful, they can hardly reach Shiva's level?! eh? Why does Hari/Krishna bow to and worship Shiva in every incarnation? How can Brahma give birth to a sinful personality? Explain this first! You are forcing this verse on us as an all and all conclusion of "Vedic" knowledge deciding Shiva's position, but can you really explain it? Your explaination is immature and incomplete. What was the reason of his sinful "birth"? Why did Rama and Krishna and Vamdev, (Vasishtha, Agastya, Upmanyu, Markandey..) worship Shiva??? SHIVA IS AUSPICIOUS. IF RUDRA IS SINFUL AND IF RUDRA AND SHIVA ARE THE SAME, THEN HOW CAN AUSPICOUS BE SINFUL??? If they are not the same then your statement is not for Shiva, but Rudra alone? Explain. As far as we know, Shiva is pure cosmic consciousness that is neither born nor ends. And this small verse from Shatapatha Brahmana, is not capable of explaining Lord Shiva's full position. It just explain this Rudra's position which is not accepted by most Shaiv or Shakta or even some Vaishnava schools (except the harekrishna's of course). Period. The Sruti says, ‘Mayam tu prakritim viddhi mayinam tu mahesvaram’. Know Prakriti to be Maya and Mahesvara to be the wielder of Maya or Prakriti. Last edited by Yogkriya : 09-28-2006 at 03:59 AM. |
|
|
|
|
|
09-28-2006, 02:06 AM
|
#49 | ||
|
Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 143
|
Quote:
The Gaudiyas are not translating Rig,Yajur and Sama Vedas. So this knowledge is not for you then I guess. Why would you even bother quoting them? Quote:
|
||
|
|
|
|
09-28-2006, 02:11 AM
|
#50 |
|
Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 359
|
Why did Rama and Krishna and Vamdev, (Vasishtha, Agastya, Upmanyu..) worship Shiva???******** There is no evidence for any of this, and if at all it's true, it's for the purpose of asuramohana, or to delude the wicked. Guess that explains it. As for Vashishta, Agastya worshipping shiva, does that make Shiva superior? If scores of people worship Bush, does that make him superior to Shiva?  The rest of your post is plain nonsense, it's all your opinion with no basis in the veda. |
|
|
|
|
09-28-2006, 02:22 AM
|
#51 |
|
Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 143
|
No Sadashiva? Read.
Sadasiva At the end of Pralaya, the Supreme Lord thinks of re-creation of the world. He is then known by the name Sadasiva. He is the root-cause of creation. From Sadasiva creation begins. In Manusmriti He is called Svayambhu. Sadasiva is unmanifested, He destroys the Tamas caused by Pralaya and shines as the self-resplendent light bringing forth the five great elements, etc., into being. The Siva Purana says that Siva is beyond both Prakriti and Purusha. Siva is Mahesvara. He is the witness, well-wisher and nourisher of all beings. The Gita says: ‘Upadrashtanumanta cha bharta bhokta mahesvarah’. Mahesvara conducts the work of creation according to His will and pleasure. The Sruti says, ‘Mayam tu prakritim viddhi mayinam tu mahesvaram’. Know Prakriti to be Maya and Mahesvara to be the wielder of Maya or Prakriti. The Shakti of Siva works in two different ways. Mula Prakriti and Daivi Prakriti. Mula Prakriti is Apara Prakriti from which the five elements and other visible objects and the Antahkarana are evolved. Para Prakriti is Chaitanya Sakti which converts the Apara Prakriti and gives name and form to it. Apara Prakriti is Avidya and Para Prakriti is Vidya. The controller and dispenser of these two Prakritis is Lord Siva. Siva is distinct from Brahma, Vishnu and Rudra. Lord Siva is the Lord of innumerable crores of Brahmandas or worlds. Isvara united with Maya gives rise to Brahma, Vishnu and Rudra out of Rajas, Sattva and Tamo Gunas respectively, under the command of Lord Siva. Brahma, Vishnu and Rudra are the trinities of the world. There is no difference among the trinities, Brahma, Vishnu and Rudra. By the command of Mahesvara these three do the creative, preservative and destructive duties of the world. The work of all the three deities is done conjointly. They all have one view and one definite purpose in creating, preserving and destroying the visible universe of names and forms. He who regards the three deities as distinct and different, Siva Purana says, is undoubtedly a devil or evil spirit. The Lord who is beyond the three Gunas, Mahesvara, has four aspects: Brahma, Kala, Rudra and Vishnu. Siva is the support for all the four. He is the substratum for Sakti also. Siva is distinct from the Rudra included in the trinities. Rudra is really one though according to the different functions He is considered to have eleven different forms. The first face of Siva does Krida or play, the second does penance, the third destroys or dissolves the world, the fourth protects the people and the fifth, being knowledge, fully covers the entire universe by its power. He is Isana the creator and promoter of all beings, from within. The first form of Siva is the enjoyer of Prakriti as Kshetrajna Purusha. The second is Tatpurusha resting in Sattva-guna, rooted in Bhogya-Prakriti, the Prakriti-enjoyed. The third is Ghora rooted in the eightfold Buddhi like Dharma, etc. The fourth is Vamadeva rooted in Ahankara and the fifth is Sadyojata, the presiding deity of the mind. The eight forms of Siva are Sarva, Bhava, Rudra, Ugra, Bhima, Pasupati, Isana and Mahadeva, rooted respectively in earth, water, fire, air, ether, Kshetrajna, sun and moon. |
|
|
|
|
09-28-2006, 02:32 AM
|
#52 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 143
|
What proof do you need to believe that Agastya and Vasishtha didn't worship Shiva??? Read the lives of these great MahaRishis. Go and read their work and treatsies. Go and find out about their sadhnas. What do you know about Agastya and Vasishtha??? What sadhna was the accomplishment of Sage Agastya? What initiation did Rama accept from Agstya? Why? Answer this. If there is something you can't comprehend or accept due to personal belief or problem, you have a ready made answer which is as wicked and as deluding - "to delude the wicked". If A.B. De worshipped Krishna then Krishna must be worth worshipping to?? Or no? If greatest of Munis - Vasishtha and Agastya and Vishwamitra worshipped Shiva, then there was a solid reason behind it? Rama himself took refuge under their holy feet and accepted them as His Gurus!! This is a historical FACT! What's there to prove??? You can refuse the whole history altogether. And you chant Hare Rama Hare Rama, you bow down to him and offer your obeisance to him and consider him as God!! So maybe he did something right? eh? Quote:
Last edited by Yogkriya : 09-28-2006 at 02:40 AM. |
|
|
|
|