RadheyRadhey108

I know that Indulekha Dasi Ji knows. She's not the one saying, "Lord Shiva is a demigod... Shaivas are pimps... Shiva and Shakti are whores..."

And, once again, where does it say, "Lord Shiva is a demigod"?

Once again, none of the verses say "Lord Shiva is a demigod".

None of these say that "Lord Shiva is a demigod". Provide a verse that states this.

Sry, I didn't know there was such a difference between Tulsidas Ramayan and Valmiki Ramayan. Why could someone not interpolate something and still keep the metre of the verses? People do it in song writing all the time. Once again, Srimad Bhagavata Purana didn't have any commentaries or copies earlier than the 10th century. Does that mean it didn't exist beforehand? Yes or no? If no is your answer, then that means that you can't prove that Shiva Sahasranam and Shiva Gita didn't exist before their copies and commentaries were written. You keep making claims, but you cite no references. You should really work on that. Could it be that Vishnu was his Ishta Deva, and that's why he put so much focus on him? It says that He is self-dependent. That means He is not dependent on Vishnu. Explain the actual verse, please.

When Rama worships Shiva, how do you know that Rama being supreme wasn’t interpolated? Where does Bhagavad Gita specifically say that Vishnu is supreme? Well, who knows which parts of the Vedas have been interpolated? How do you know sections of the Vedas haven’t been interpolated? Oh, but how can we be sure as to what has been interpolated and what hasn’t? Shaivas clearly did, since they aren’t Vaishnavas. So, you’re just going to cite something and not give a reference? The earliest copy we have of the Srimad Bhagavata Purana and any succeeding commentaries are from the 10^th century onward. Does that mean it didn’t exist before-hand? I was talking to a Gaudiya Vaishnava. They consider the Radha Sahasranam to be pranama. If he truly taught this, then why do his followers worship all deities? Since you are so smart, please explain this verse to me:To Rudra bring these songs, whose bow is firm and strong, the self-dependent God with swiftly-flying shafts. --Rig Veda 7.45.1

Your snippy comments didn't get to me. I realize that you can speak only from emotion since you have no evidence.

You're the one making baseless claims.

You say things without providing evidence. I'm just wondering where you get your ideas from. You haven't told me. Where does it say 'Shiva is a demigod who is less than Vishnu/Rama/Krishna'? What is the exact verse that says that all gods other than Vishnu are demigods? You clearly can't teach anything, since you obviously have no evidence to supply. Yes, that's because you speak solely from emotion on these issues.

Mahabharata still crumbles if you say that some parts are made up and some parts aren't. If we don't accept all of it, we might as well accept none of it, since we can never be sure what is true and what is false. You can't be sure that the 'Shiva is a Jivatma' verse that you [indirectly] cited isn't an interpolation and the verse that I quoted that says that Vishnu is Shiva and Shiva is Vishnu isn't an interpolation. Reference? I haven't seen strong enough evidence provided by you to prove that Advaita was originally solely Vaishnava. What are your acharya's interpretation of verses such as this one?: To Rudra bring these songs, whose bow is firm and strong, the self-dependent God with swiftly-flying shafts. --Rig Veda 7.45.1 I haven't studied the schools of Shaivism in-depth, so I'll take your word for it. Does Vishnu not contain Himself?

You are still only speaking from emotion. You admit that you have no proof. That means that you are speaking solely from emotion, which proves nothing. Shaivas will emotionally tell you that Shiva is absolute truth. Are they right? Shaktas will emotionally tell you that Shakti is the absolute truth. Are they right? You (a Vaishnava) are emotionally telling me that Lord Rama is the absolute truth without evidence to speak of. Why should I believe you over a Shaiva or Shakta, since you are all speaking solely from emotion and not from evidence?

I was looking back and saw it? No, it's not. It's his translation of this verse: http://srimadbhagavatam.com/10/47/60/en Do you have a different translation you'd like to share with us?

How do you know what is true and what is false in it? Do you think Gita is true? If so, why? If what you say is true, then how can you possibly tell the fact from the fiction? I'm sure that there are Shaiva gurus who have commented on Shiva Sahasranam, since most Shaivas recite it. There are many schools of Hinduism... there's a reason for that. Each views Brahman differently. The only verse that you indirectly cited says is that Vishnu is in the Atman of Shiva. Is Vishnu not in the Atman of Krishna and Rama as well, since He is Their atman? I don't see how that necessarily classifies one as a jivatma. Also, since you think it's been tampered with, how do you know that Shiva being a jiva wasn't a later addition (if He is truly called a jivatma). Well, which one do you think was the right one? Jeez... testy, aren't we?

They actually do have reason to believe that: When Lord Sri Krishna was dancing with the gopīs in the rasa-lila, the gopīs were embraced by the arms of the Lord. This transcendental favor was never bestowed upon the goddess of fortune or other consorts in the spiritual world. Indeed, never was such a thing even imagined by the most beautiful girls in the heavenly planets, whose bodily luster and aroma resemble the lotus flower. And what to speak of worldly women who are very beautiful according to material estimation? --Srimad Bhagavata Purana 10.47.60 I, personally, think that all of the Gopis and Radharani were incarnations of Lakshmi Devi, and, therefore, admit that I do not understand the verse in the slightest. Do you have an explanation?

No evidence, just emotion.

So, in other words, you think the Mahabharata is just a made up story? Or, just the parts you don't like? What is your evidence for an interpolation?

Well, I'm sure he'd have no qualms admitting that he thinks he's the best. So, in other words, you don't know what it is?

So, you think that Lord Rama is supreme over all deities, but you aren't going to argue your case? You're just going to say it and not provide evidence?

Your response is rather garbled. I'm going with the assumption that you were under the impression that I was saying that Shiva is supreme? Well, going off of this assumption, I wasn't arguing that one was supreme over the other. I was showing that They are equal.

Darkwarrior, don't Sri Vaishnavas accept Mahabharata as authentic shastra?: And Arjuna said, 'O Kapardin, O chief of all gods, O destroyer of the eyes of Bhaga, O god of gods, O Mahadeva, O thou of blue throat, O thou of matted locks, I know thee as the Cause of all causes. O thou of three eyes, O lord of all! Thou art the refuge of all the gods! This universe hath sprung from thee. Thou art incapable of being vanquished by the three worlds of the celestials, the Asuras, and men. Thou art Shiva in the form of Vishnu, and Vishnu in the form of Shiva. Thou destroyedest of old the great sacrifice of Daksha. O Hari-Rudra, I bow to thee. Thou hast an eye on thy forehead. O Sarva, O thou that rainest objects of desire, O bearer of the trident, O wielder of the Pinaka, O Surya, O thou of pure body, O Creator of all, I bow to thee. O lord of all created things, I worship thee to obtain thy grace. Thou art the lord of the Ganas, the source of universal blessing, the Cause of the causes of the universe. Thou art beyond the foremost of male beings, thou art the highest, thou art the subtlest, O Hara! O illustrious Sankara, it behoveth thee to pardon my fault. It was even to obtain a sight of thyself that I came to this great mountain, which is dear to thee and which is the excellent abode of ascetics. Thou art worshipped of all worlds. O lord, I worship thee to obtain thy grace. Let not this rashness of mine be regarded as a fault--this combat in which I was engaged with thee from ignorance. O Sankara, I seek thy protection. Pardon me all I have done." --Mahabharata: Vana Parva: Kairata Parva: Section 39

Oh God! Bhaktajan, look at all of this 'blasphemy'!: OMG! Where do these 'sinners' come up with such 'blasphemy'?! Oh, yea, that's right... shastra!: O all-auspicious Yogamaya, I shall then appear with My full six opulences as the son of Devaki, and you will appear as the daughter of mother Yashoda, the queen of Maharaja Nanda. Through offerings, ordinary human beings will worship you gorgeously, with various paraphernalia, because You are supreme in fulfilling the desires of all. Lord Krishna spoke thusly with Mayadevi: In different places on the surface of the earth, people will give you different names, such as Durga, Bhadrakali, Vijaya, Vaishnavi, Kumuda, Chandika, Krishnaa,Madhavi, Kanyaka, Maya, Narayani, Ishani, Sharada and Ambika. --Srimad Bhagavata Purana 10.2.9-12 My dear King, after they had bathed in the water of the Yamuna just as the sun was rising, the gopīs made an earthen deity of goddess Durga on the riverbank. Then they worshiped her with such aromatic substances as sandalwood pulp, along with other items both opulent and simple, including lamps, fruits, betel nuts, newly grown leaves, and fragrant garlands and incense. Each of the young unmarried girls performed her worship while chanting the following mantra: "O goddess Katyayani, O great power of the Lord, O possessor of great mystic power and mighty controller of all, please make the son of Nanda Maharaja my husband. I offer my obeisances unto You." --Srimad Bhagavata Purana 10.22.3-5 And Arjuna said, 'O Kapardin, O chief of all gods, O destroyer of the eyes of Bhaga, O god of gods, O Mahadeva, O thou of blue throat, O thou of matted locks, I know thee as the Cause of all causes. O thou of three eyes, O lord of all! Thou art the refuge of all the gods! This universe hath sprung from thee. Thou art incapable of being vanquished by the three worlds of the celestials, the Asuras, and men. Thou art Siva in the form of Vishnu, and Vishnu in the form of Siva. Thou destroyedest of old the great sacrifice of Daksha. O Hari-Rudra, I bow to thee. Thou hast an eye on thy forehead. O Sarva, O thou that rainest objects of desire, O bearer of the trident, O wielder of the Pinaka, O Surya, O thou of pure body, O Creator of all, I bow to thee. O lord of all created things, I worship thee to obtain thy grace. Thou art the lord of the Ganas, the source of universal blessing, the Cause of the causes of the universe. Thou art beyond the foremost of male beings, thou art the highest, thou art the subtlest, O Hara! O illustrious Sankara, it behoveth thee to pardon my fault. It was even to obtain a sight of thyself that I came to this great mountain, which is dear to thee and which is the excellent abode of ascetics. Thou art worshipped of all worlds. O lord, I worship thee to obtain thy grace. Let not this rashness of mine be regarded as a fault--this combat in which I was engaged with thee from ignorance. O Sankara, I seek thy protection. Pardon me all I have done." --Mahabharata: Vana Parva: Kairata Parva: Section 39

You do realize that you make sense to no one but yourself, don't you?

Bhaktajan is the most 'exalted personality' of them all, since he thinks that we must surrender to him. He's vain, pompous, and arrogant. He has expressed no devotion to Hari here. The only person he's even asked us to surrender to is himself. And, what is Bhagavata Doctrine? Is Bhagavata Doctrine comparing Shaiva devotion to that of a prostitute's reliance on drugs and sex? Is Bhagavata Doctrine calling Shiva and Shakti whores? Is Bhagavata Doctrine calling Shaivas and Shaktas the pimps of Shiva and Devi? Is Bhagavata Doctrine calling all Shaivas and Shaktas 'demigod worshippers' who are 'selfish'? Is Bhagavata Doctrine asking others to surrender to you because you view yourself as having a sense of entitlement next to that of God Himself? Is that what Bhagavata Doctrine is? Because, if it is, then Bhaktajan certainily fits the criteria for a follower of 'Bhagavata Doctrine'.

They are Shaivas. Lord Rama worshipped Lord Shiva as Linga Rupa. Radharani is called both 'Shiva Bhakta' [a devotee of Lord Shiva] AND 'Shiva Bhakti Daa' [she who gives devotion to Lord Shiva]. And, do you remember who She worshipped in order to gain Lord Krishna as Her lover? Oh, yea, that's right, Durga Mata in the form of Katyayani. She was both a Shaiva and a Shakta. What, exactly, are you missing?

Really? My guru, who is, likewise, descended from Brahma, told me that Krishna only had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of Lord Shiva's qualities! And, Lord Shiva only has 84.164149649848498458946798454179854417644565468945496845476514654178945469844598641546571645547895447985417654517985441978544179844517651456574854974984547145175469479854475948471541745964179854417984541761549+87454987445987641654517655417695441798451745637414587454987445987414987546474594714547169544176441676554176554479845494851456237165547445985744598474567165457145657145637454987445987445978445987445974549845479847984541765541732174987498457498% of Devi's qualities! And, She only has 99.15641864894861106165498498469416116316849847987456152416341649847984654984498431349879897643549887984351679876468434168798% of Lord Brahma's qualities!