Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by RadheyRadhey108


    Originally Posted by indulekhadasi:

    Lord Shiva is the greatest devotee: vaishnavanam yatha sambuh.

    Do you disagree with what I am saying?

    For Vaishnavas, Lord Shiva is NOT a demigod, He is the Supreme Vaishnava.



    Yes yes yes! I know! I know! I know!

    You know, We know!

    But there is someone lurking who thinks we don't know!


    Should one reveal their plans to non-wellwishers & nay-sayers?


    Oops, to late. The beans have been spilt. Will those someones know to volunteer to clean up the mess they caused.


    Hey RadheyRadhey108! Get to the kitchen with your best apron and cleans the pots now! Thank you.

    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..." ;)


    I try to spare you un-pleasant truths so as to let live as blissfully innocents do, but you keep asking for medicine:



    SB 1.2.26:

    Those who are serious about liberation are certainly nonenvious, and they respect all. Yet they reject the horrible and ghastly forms of the demigods and worship only the all-blissful forms of Lord Viñëu and His plenary portions.



    SB 11.2.6:

    Those who worship the demigods receive reciprocation from the demigods in a way just corresponding to the offering. The demigods are attendants of karma, like a person’s shadow, but sädhus are actually merciful to the fallen.


    SB 3.2.37:

    O gentle one, of all the physical elements, beginning from the sky down to the earth, all the inferior and superior qualities are due only to the final touch of the glance of the Supreme Personality of Godhead.


    SB 3.28.22:

    The blessed Lord Çiva becomes all the more blessed by bearing on his head the holy waters of the <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com><st1:place w:st=Ganges</st1:place>, which has its source in the water that washed the Lord’s lotus feet. The Lord’s feet act like thunderbolts hurled to shatter the mountain of sin stored in the mind of the meditating devotee. One should therefore meditate on the lotus feet of the Lord for a long time.</b>

    <font face=" /><st1:place w:st="on"><FONT face=Balaram>Ganges</st1:place><FONT face=Balaram>, which has its source in the water that washed the Lord’s lotus feet. The Lord’s feet act like thunderbolts hurled to shatter the mountain of sin stored in the mind of the meditating devotee. One should therefore meditate on the lotus feet of the Lord for a long time.


    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>PURPORT


    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>In this verse the position of Lord Çiva is specifically mentioned. The impersonalist suggests that the Absolute Truth has no form and that one can therefore equally imagine the form of Viñëu or Lord Çiva or the goddess Durgä or their son Gaëeça.


    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>But actually the Supreme Personality of Godhead is the supreme master of everyone. In the Caitanya-caritämåta (Ädi 5.142) it is said, ekale éçvara kåñëa, ara saba bhåtya: the Supreme Lord is Kåñëa, and everyone else, including Lord Çiva and Lord Brahmä—not to mention other demigods—is a servant of Kåñëa.


    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>The same principle is described here. Lord Çiva is important because he is holding on his head the holy Ganges water, which has its origin in the foot-wash of Lord Viñëu.


    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>In the Hari-bhakti-viläsa, by Sanätana Gosvämé, it is said that anyone who puts the Supreme Lord and the demigods, including Lord Çiva and Lord Brahmä, on the same level, at once becomes a päñaëòé, or atheist. We should never consider that the Supreme Lord Viñëu and the demigods are on an equal footing.

    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>

    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>

    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>Another significant point of this verse is that the mind of the conditioned soul, on account of its association with the material energy from time immemorial, contains heaps of dirt in the form of desires to lord it over material nature. This dirt is like a mountain, but a mountain can be shattered when hit by a thunderbolt.


    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>Meditating on the lotus feet of the Lord acts like a thunderbolt on the mountain of dirt in the mind of the yogé. If a yogé wants to shatter the mountain of dirt in his mind, he should concentrate on the lotus feet of the Lord and not imagine something void or impersonal. Because the dirt has accumulated like a solid mountain, one must meditate on the lotus feet of the Lord for quite a long time.


    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>For one who is accustomed to thinking of the lotus feet of the Lord constantly, however, it is a different matter. The devotees are so fixed on the lotus feet of the Lord that they do not think of anything else. Those who practice the yoga system must meditate on the lotus feet of the Lord for a long time after following the regulative principles and thereby controlling the senses.

    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>

    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>

    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>It is specifically mentioned here, bhagavataç caraëäravindam: one has to think of the lotus feet of the Lord. The Mäyävädés imagine that one can think of the lotus feet of Lord Çiva or Lord Brahmä or the goddess Durgä to achieve liberation, but this is not so. Bhagavataù is specifically mentioned. Bhagavataù means “of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Viñëu,” and no one else. Another significant phrase in this verse is çivaù çivo ’bhüt.


    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>By his constitutional position, Lord Çiva is always great and auspicious, but since he has accepted on his head the Ganges water, which emanated from the lotus feet of the Lord, he has become even more auspicious and important. The stress is on the lotus feet of the Lord. A relationship with the lotus feet of the Lord can even enhance the importance of Lord Çiva, what to speak of other, ordinary living entities.

    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>......................................................................................

    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>

    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>

    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>

    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>SB 4.19.22 Purport:

    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>. . . Vedic literature states that a person who puts Lord Näräyaëa on the level with Lord Çiva or Lord Brahmä immediately becomes a päkhaëòé. As stated in the Puräëas:





    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>yas tu näräyaëaà devaà






    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>brahma-rudrädi-daivataiù






    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>samatvenaiva vékñeta



    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>sa päñaëòé bhaved dhruvam





    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>In Kali-yuga the päkhaëòés are very prominent. However, Lord Çré Caitanya Mahäprabhu has tried to kill all these päkhaëòés by introducing His saìkértana movement. Those who take advantage of this saìkértana movement of the International Society for <st1:place w:st="on">Krishna</st1:place> Consciousness will be able to save themselves from the influence of these päkhaëòés.

    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>......................................................................................

    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>

    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>

    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>SB 4.19.23 Purport:

    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>. . . In the Vaiñëava Tantra it is said:

    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>yas tu näräyaëaà devaà

    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>brahma-rudrädi-daivataiù

    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>samatvenaiva vékñeta

    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>sa päñaëòé bhaved dhruvam

    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>Although it is forbidden, there are many päñaëòés who coin terms like daridra-näräyaëa and svämi-näräyaëa, although not even such demigods as Brahmä and Çiva can be equal to Näräyaëa.

    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>

    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>......................................................................................

    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>SB 4.30.24 Purport:

    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>. . . One should therefore not think that Lord Viñëu is in the same category with Lord Brahmä and Çiva. The çästras forbid us to think in this way.




    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>yas tu näräyaëaà devaà





    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>brahma-rudrädi-daivataiù





    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>samatvenaiva vékñeta





    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>sa päñaëòé bhaved dhruvam




    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>One who considers Lord Viñëu to be in the same category with devas like Lord Brahmä or Lord Çiva or who thinks Lord Brahmä and Çiva to be equal to Lord Viñëu is to be considered as päñaëòé (a faithless nonbeliever). Therefore in this verse Lord Viñëu is distinguished in the words namo viçuddha-sattväya. Although a living entity like us, Lord Brahmä is exalted due to his pious activities; therefore he is given the high post of Brahmä. Lord Çiva is not actually like a living entity, but he is not the Supreme Personality of Godhead. His position is somewhere between Viñëu, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and Brahmä, the living entity. Lord Çiva is therefore explained in Brahma-saàhitä (5.45) in this way:




    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>kñéraà yathä dadhi vikära-viçeña-yogät





    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>saïjäyate na hi tataù påthag <st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">asti</st1:place></st1:City> hetoù





    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>yaù çambhutäm api tathä samupaiti käryäd





    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>govindam ädi-puruñaà tam ahaà bhajämi





    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>Lord Çiva is considered to be like yogurt (dadhi). Yogurt is nothing but transformed milk; nonetheless, yogurt cannot be accepted as milk. Similarly, Lord Çiva holds almost all the powers of Lord Viñëu, and he is also above the qualities of the living entity, but he is not exactly like Viñëu, just as yogurt, although transformed milk, is not exactly like milk.

    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>The Supreme Personality of Godhead is also described herein as väsudeväya kåñëäya. Kåñëa is the original Supreme Personality of Godhead, and all Viñëu expansions are His plenary portions or portions of His plenary portions (known as sväàça and kalä).

    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>

    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>

    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>

    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>SB 11.5.32




    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>kåñëa-varëaà tviñäkåñëaà





    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>säìgopäìgästra-pärñadam





    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>yajïaiù saìkértana-präyair





    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>yajanti hi su-medhasaù


    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>


    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>SYNONYMS












    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>kåñëa-varëam—repeating the syllables kåñ-ëa; tviñä—with a luster; akåñëam—not black (golden); sa-aìga—along with associates; upa-aìga—servitors; astra—weapons; pärñadam—confidential companions; yajïaiù—by sacrifice; saìkértana-präyaiù—consisting chiefly of congregational chanting; yajanti—they worship; hi—certainly; su-medhasaù—intelligent persons.




    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>TRANSLATION



    <FONT face=Balaram><FONT size=3>In the age of Kali, intelligent persons perform congregational chanting to worship the incarnation of Godhead who constantly sings the names of Kåñëa. Although His complexion is not blackish, He is Kåñëa Himself. He is accompanied by His associates, servants, weapons and confidential companions.











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



    Krishna is Vishnu

    Secondly, Rama never worshipped Shiva. Valmiki Ramayana says Rama worshipped Himself, ie, Narayana.

    Stop relying on Tulasidas Ramayana. It isn't authentic. Valmiki says Rama broke Shiva's bow. There is no reference of Rama consecrating a Shiva Linga, as mordern day hindus believe.

    And nice logic. Rama being supreme is interpolated? That means the entire Ramayana is an interpolation!!

    The Ramayana is in pristine form. The only identified interpolation is Aditya Hridayam.

    Sry, I didn't know there was such a difference between Tulsidas Ramayan and Valmiki Ramayan.


    ..The very fact that you ask if the Vedas are interpolated shows your complete ignorance of Vedanta.

    The Veda cannot be interpolated because an interpolation will cause the metre of the hymn to fall. This way, a couple of interpolations have been identified.

    Therefore, Vedas are apaurusheya and authority. Whatever they say is ultimate. So, only those parts that agree with Shruti are accepted. This is the first and most important rule of Vedanta.

    Quite simple. You, being an ignoramus, lack a complete knowledge of Veda.

    Why could someone not interpolate something and still keep the metre of the verses? People do it in song writing all the time.


    If you want a reference to Santi Parva, I suggest you search these forums. Not just me, many people have quoted it here. Not hard to find in the old Shiva/Vishnu threads.

    it is your duty to show me a reference. Give me a Shaivite commentary of Shiva Gita or Shiva Sahasranama dating to the 13th century.

    Srimad Bhagavatam agrees with Shruti. It is also quoted by Sri Madhva. Since Madhva was able to identify spurious versions of many texts, I believe his scholarship.

    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.


    Happened with Appaya Dikshitar's works.

    The deterioration of Advaita came about the 16th century. Advaitins naturally will not be able to understand why they should worship one god alone, naturally, it has resulted in this.

    You keep making claims, but you cite no references. You should really work on that.


    Sankara and his disciples were Vaishnavas and that cannot be denied. Although in a sense, it seems useless to restrict worship to one god if you are an advaitin, Sri Sankara apparently still advocated only Vishnu bhakti because he, being a Vedantin, knew that Vishnu was praised as Supreme throughout the Veda.

    Could it be that Vishnu was his Ishta Deva, and that's why he put so much focus on him?


    This will be the last time I explain this. If anyone else comes again asking for it, I won't.

    In one portion, Shruti says Rudra is supreme. In another portion, it says Rudra was created.

    Brihadaranyaka says, everything, Prakrti, Jivas, etc. are the body of Brahman.

    When I call you 'Radhey', I refer to your body and soul together as one entity. Since Brahman resides in the soul of Shiva, to say 'Shiva is Supreme' addresses Brahman within Shiva.

    Purusha Suktam identifies Brahman as Lakshmi Pathi.

    In an analogy, if I address a woman saying 'hair is beautiful', the praise goes to the woman and not just to the hair. Hence, all devas are parts/limbs of Vishnu, and praise of any deva goes to Vishnu. Anganyanya Devata, meaning, all these devas are His limbs. Confirmed by Vishnu Sahasranama as well.

    That Vishnu is Brahman is substantiated everywhere in Veda.

    If you do not interpret Veda his way, you have contradictions everywhere because in some portions one deity is called supreme, and elsewhere this same deity also has faults.

    There are 3 ways of interpretation:

    1) Vishnu is the referrant of all names. 'Shiva' simply means 'Auspicious'. 'Rudra' means 'Destroyer of Evil'. Hence, 'Brahman is Shiva' can mean 'Brahman is Auspicious' and not Mahadeva.

    2) If however, the Vedas say something like 'Mahadeva with 3 eyes is Supreme', the body/soul concept I explained can be applied. Because in Mahanarayana Upanishad, Shiva is mentioned to be a part of creation.

    3) Thirdly, each deva is endowed with an attribute of Brahman. However, Brahman, being Vishnu, has all their attributes. Praise of any deva is equivalent to praising one attribute of Brahman.

    Hence, do not aimlessly post 'Agni is Supreme', 'Indra is Supreme', 'Rudra is Supreme', etc. There is a systematic way to understand who is Supreme. Just because Krishna says 'I am Brahma, I am Vayu' it does not mean these devas are identical to Him. Rather, He is the soul of Brahma's soul (as per Brihadaranyaka) and hence, just like your body and soul are together called by one name, Vishnu alone is the referrent of hymns like 'Indra/Rudra/Agni is Supreme'.

    You might ask, why can't we say, 'All praise goes to Shiva and not Vishnu? Simple. Because, the birth of Mahadeva is given in S.Brahmana, Yajur Veda, Rig Veda and Mahanarayana Upanishad. He is mentioned to vanish during pralaya along with stars, sun, moon and Brahma. A created and flawed entity cannot be supreme.

    Vishnu, however, is praised as unborn and the Lord of Devas. Purusha Suktam and Narayana Suktam further elaborate the supremacy of Vishnu.

    It says that He is self-dependent. That means He is not dependent on Vishnu. Explain the actual verse, please.


    the only parts that are interpolated pertain to the supremacy of a God. Incidents such as the Kurukshetra war are intact. When Shruti says Vishnu is Supreme, when Bhagavad Gita says Vishnu is Supreme, When Ramayana says Rama is Supreme, then there is little doubt that Mahabharata is interpolated.
    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?


    We cannot go to Ithihasas or Purana without clarifying the Vedas first. Vedas say Vishnu is Supreme. Hence, the portions of Smriti that agree with this are accepted.
    Well, who knows which parts of the Vedas have been interpolated?


    If Puranas do not agree with vedas, they are rejected.
    How do you know sections of the Vedas haven’t been interpolated?


    Besides, Sri Madhva and Sri Desikar have quoted the 'Shiva is a Jivatma' verse.

    Understand the rules - Shruti is apaurusheya. Hence, whatever it says is correct. Smriti can be accepted only if it agrees with Shruti. Otherwise, discard it wholesale.

    Oh, but how can we be sure as to what has been interpolated and what hasn’t?


    Furthermore, Vaishnavas had provided many proofs from the Mahabharata itself in ancient times to prove the Supremacy of Vishnu. If Shiva Sahasranama had existed, don't you think people would have come forward to refute them, or to question their selective usage of verses glorifying Vishnu alone?
    Shaivas clearly did, since they aren’t Vaishnavas.


    Lastly, I do not need to quote it 'indirectly'. Go refer it yourself.
    So, you’re just going to cite something and not give a reference?


    You are a nutjob. It is your duty to provide me with a reference. Show me a commentary on Shiva Gita or Sahasranama dating to 12-13th century.
    The earliest copy we have of the Srimad Bhagavata Purana and any succeeding commentaries are from the 10<sup>th</sup> century onward. Does that mean it didn’t exist before-hand?


    Read Sankara Bhashya. Should be enough. For that matter, I do not think anyone who thinks Radha Sahasranama is a pramana can actually be qualified for that.
    I was talking to a Gaudiya Vaishnava. They consider the Radha Sahasranam to be pranama.


    Sri Puttur Swami and Sri PBA Swami presented the same evidence to Sri Chandrashekar Saraswati of Kanchi Mutt. When Sankara clearly discourages worship of Rudra in his Gita Bhashya, rejects Shaivism and Shaktism in his Brahma Sutra Bhashya, accepts the Bhagavata doctrine of Narayana being Supreme, there is little doubt about what his inclination was.
    If he truly taught this, then why do his followers worship all deities?


    I have explained all this many times. Read my earlier posts. Ignoramuses like you unfortunately, never get the gist of what I am saying, so I am not going to repeat it.

    Or, get a copy of Ramanuja bhashya to understand. Or, go to a Vaishnava website for the basics.

    Its clear that you know nothing. Anyone who takes one isolated verse of Veda, without a knowledge of systems like Chaga Pasu Nyaaya or Sarva Shabdha Vachyatva is sorely lacking. Ever heard of these systems? Obviously not.

    Simply quoting a dozen verses of 'Agni is Supreme', 'Vayu is Supreme', or Krishna saying 'I am Brahma, I am Shiva' without a knowledge of philosophy and metaphysics is useless.

    Idiotic. Vishnu is Paramatma. How can He have an indweller? His svarupa pervades, and at the same time, He exists in a beautiful form localised.

    Again, RadheyRadhey108, I advise you to open another thread. Quite frankly, you have not produced one sensible post.

    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


    And since when did I ask you to believe me.


    You say things without providing evidence. I'm just wondering where you get your ideas from. You haven't told me.



    I also gave you the answer in my previous post. The answer is found in Srimad Bhagvatam. All the evidences are there.


    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?



    Again if it took 7 days to teach Bhagvata, that too the best teacher and best student. How can I, a person not having the quality of a teacher teach to the most foolish of student.:rolleyes:


    You clearly can't teach anything, since you obviously have no evidence to supply.



    Ok, in that case, I've let my emotion flow.:cool:


    Yes, that's because you speak solely from emotion on these issues.


    Whatever Shruti says is authority. Whatever follows Shruti is authority.


    A basic rule in Vedanta. Hence, those parts not contradictory to Shruti are accepted.


    Vaishnavas are undefeated as far as Shruti is concerned.

    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.


    It is a historical fact that Shiva Sahasranama was not mentioned by anyone before the 16th century atleast. Not even Devout Shaivites. Otherwise, people would have questioned why Adi Sankara and others chose Vishnu Sahasranama exclusively and not Shiva Sahasranama.



    Every School of Vedanta is Vaishnavite. You can check that yourself. Even Advaita was originally a Vaishnavite school.

    I haven't seen strong enough evidence provided by you to prove that Advaita was originally solely Vaishnava.


    Shaivism is a diverse faith. Majority of them reject the Vedas fully. And most of the sects of Shaivas are always monistic. Unless you use Atman=Brahman Logic, you cannot prove Shaivism.

    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


    Dualistic Shaivism is quite a rarity. Srikantha tried such a thing, but Appaya Dikshitar absorbed that into his Shiva Advaita as well.


    On the contrary, there is no school of Vaishnavism that is unvedic. Every sect of Vaishnavism has its own, organised commentaries on the prasthna trayam. Most Shaivas do not even have a single commentary to their credit.

    I haven't studied the schools of Shaivism in-depth, so I'll take your word for it.


    Ignorance. Rama and Krishna are Brahman, ie, Vishnu. Shiva is a Jivatman who has Vishnu as His indweller. Rama or Krishna don't have indwellers.

    Does Vishnu not contain Himself?


    Take it as you like...


    But I'll give you a hint...


    I've never searched for any evidence, but it came by itself to me.


    I suppose you are unaware of the Bhagvata Doctrine; if you have read then it means you have not understood or misunderstood; all the evidences are there.


    It took 7 seven days for Sukadev Goswami to explain that to Maharaj Parikshit and you are asking me that in a Forum.


    Good Lord, I know I'm not even worth to touch the dust of the Lotus Feet of Sukadev but you also can't be a better student than Maharaj Parikshit.


    If you cannot see the absolute truth, it does not mean that I'm emotional, it means you are ignorant.

    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?


    No, I believe that the Mahabharata is a historical tale that has been interpolated many, many times.

    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?


    If Shiva Sahasranama was an integral part of the Mahabharata, it is very striking that no scholar has even referred to it. 10 Commentaries on Vishnu Sahasranama exist, but none on Shiva Sahasranama.

    I'm sure that there are Shaiva gurus who have commented on Shiva Sahasranam, since most Shaivas recite it.


    And indeed, if it had existed earlier, it would be a text of great importance, because it proposes a completely different view of Brahman.

    There are many schools of Hinduism... there's a reason for that. Each views Brahman differently.


    One text cannot contain diametrically opposed views, viz., Shiva is Brahman and Shiva is Jiva unless it is interpolated. Hence, it is unsuitable as a valid pramana.

    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).


    There were a dozen different versions of the Mahabharata during Madhva's times. Speaks for itself, doesn't it?

    Well, which one do you think was the right one?


    I suggest you stop acting belligerently and follow your beliefs. This thread is about Advaita, not Shaivism.

    Jeez... testy, aren't we?


    that Lakshmi was not in the Rasa Lila?


    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? :confused:


    What's the use of providing evidence when Lord Rama is in front of you, if you are blind, that's not my fault.


    If you need quotes to know the Supremacy of Sri Rama then I can't help you...


    The only process is wait for His Mercy, in the meantime continue with your good Karma, amass a lot Punya till He sees you and decide that it's time to enlighten you.


    I've heard and know that thousands of Sheshas and Saraswatis cannot recount His Glories and you want me to give evidence about His Supremacy.

    Do you think it is as easy as that. Wait for His mercy.

    No evidence, just emotion. :rolleyes:


    I suggest, people stop taking the subject of this thread away.


    Mahabharata is an interpolated text and is not pramana. In Santi Parva, Krishna tells Arjuna that Narayana resides within the atman of Shiva, therby labelling Shiva as a Jivatma. In another place, Shiva is equated to Vishnu. Both cannot be the opinion of Vyasa. Hence, it is safe to conclude that Shiva Sahasranama and other parts are interpolations.


    Brahman has one specific rupa and is present in one specific location (despite being all pervading) according to the Veda. This rupa is described to have two eyes that are as beautiful as lotuses blossomed by the Sun. The Jitante Stotram says that Brahman manifests His divine form with weapons, etc. for the sake of His devotees. Hence, Shiva=Vishnu is not tenable, unless you use the Advaitin equation of Atman=Brahman. Either Vishnu > Shiva, or Shiva > Vishnu. And the former view carries more weight.


    Now, stick to the topic of the thread.

    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?


    Might be...


    But if he is sincere in his quest for Hari, then even the worst is considered the best.

    Well, I'm sure he'd have no qualms admitting that he thinks he's the best.


    It's a different platform.

    So, in other words, you don't know what it is?


    No. But fighting to prove the Supremacy of Raja Ram will have the secondary effect in putting low the dearest of Raja Ram.


    In the very beginning, when I registered myself in Audarya, I made this comment.


    But no one is ready to listen. In this so-called debate, only the defamation of both will be heard, irrespective of whoever might be right.


    All of you, continue with your monkey business, I'm out.

    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?


    radhey radhey, when you quote such a verse, it is appropriate when i cal it out of context....Arjuna was talking about bhagwan Shankar ALONE.There is no independence of Mahadeva without Godhead Himself,Krsna.

    Why is it so tough to digest that Godhead can take of a couple of material qualities and transform Himself into Rudra ?? Or that Godhead's glance is the selfsame as the state of Shambhu ??

    There have been so many incarnations of Hari hara...

    So,i think debating on who is Supreme is pointless becoz Advait jnana tattva is svagat bheda shunya.Sri krsna has ABSOLUTELY NO CONFLICTS WITH HIS INCARNATIONS,EXPANSIONS AND TRANSFORMATIONS.It is all harmonised by His acintya shakti.

    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.


    Namaste Darkwarrior.


    Skanda Upanishad solves this dilemma for us when in verses 8 and 9 it states

    However I understand Sri Vaishnavas don't consider this Upanishad to be authentic, yes?


    Regardless, these arguments about what the Vedas mean, the authenticity of certain Upanishads, whether Shankaracharya was a Vaishnava etc. have been done to death already, and I agree with you that we should not hijack this thread and turn it into another one of those endless debates.


    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

  16. 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


    I'm afraid that is illegal except in some back alleys of some southeast asian cities.


    But I'm sure you're sincere in your quest to rectifiy you own Inferiority complex. May God help your Blooming arse.

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


    A frustrated little boy or a frustrated Sanyassi sincerely surrendered to Hari is far much better than an exalted personalty devoid of the Bhagvata Doctrine.

    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'.



    And Radharani and Rama are Shaivas --So bogus. Stop being shameless!

    Shamelessness means offending authorities, decorum, propriety.


    I accept the Devas as is explained in the Srimad-bhagavatam.


    I don't require non-Vaishnavas to crash the party to announce that a new Host has re-defined who is being celebrated.

    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?


    I heard from my guru who got it from shastra that came from brahma that it is actually 85.965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741965844236515752368489294485545455452698564753158998855544141475369992225458963255447741%

    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!

  • Create New...