ranjeetmore

 

 

Therein lies the problem. You are equating the part with the whole. This is leading to an ambiguous situation in which, on one hand, you argue for the supremacy of Vishnu over the "demigods," and yet on the other hand you are placing some "demigods" on the same level as Vishnu.

i find it funny that after providing so many quotes of the Gaudiya acharyas,you insist on calling Shiva as a demigod...like Varun or agni.

In Bhagavaa 1.3.28 the "demigods" Manus, etc are also referred to as "amshas" of the Lord. Do you accept that they are identical to the Lord?

advaitas who perform krsna bhakti are certainly not foolish...but they surely are stubborn...Gauranga is shouting,"Don't ask for mukti ! Don't ever ask for mukti !!"

and they are adamant.

gaudiya vaishnavite who followed tantra..I'm not taunting...but can you explain how it works ?????

i mean...how ??

wow . that means dasanami sampradayas of sankarachraya are the most infalliable for they have produced mahatmas for the last 1000 years .

 

double gaurantee !!

 

so why should anyone go for single gaurantee ?!!

oh but look what adi shankaracharya says,"Shuddhayati na antar aatma krsna padambhoj bhaktimriteh."

and the upanishads say,"mind is the reason for conditioned and liberated states."

So those people who have ACTUALLY attached their minds to sri Krsna fully can be said to be mahatmas.

Are you including iskcon in that supposition?

after Srila prbhupada.

no.

Fine.

 

It is not clear what you mean, because the language you use is imprecise and inconsistent. By standard meanings a "part" is something that is less than a whole. So saying "part" automatically assumes a lesser status. Now it appears that you are saying "part" but it is not really "part" in the conventional sense. That is like the Sai Baba fanatic saying "you must accept Sai Baba to get liberation" and then rationalizing it by saying "oh, but actually Sai Baba does not mean the person Sai Baba in Puttaparthi, it actually means 'universal consciousness.'"

You kinda always had the habit to show the person down before you actually took out bits and pieces of his post and went on and on.

Amsa loosely means part.My post was meant to imply that the amsas(sva amsas) of Godhead are identical with Him.

If could be so kind enough to give me a better word than 'part',i would substitute it in my post.

So far, no problems here. But what does this have to do with Durga and Vishnu?

That Mahavishnu being an amsa of Sri KRsna is fully identical with Him.

Similarly,Durga of the material world(mahamaya),being a amsa/transformation/reflection of Durga of vaikuntha(yogmaya),is identical with Her.

Here is the problem. You acknowledge that Vishnu is the Supreme Being. Then you say that Vishnu and Durga are identical. But then if that is true, you must accept that Durga is the Supreme Being. Do you? Because that would make you not a Vaishnava but something else.

 

If A = B, then A and B must have the same properties. Otherwise the statement A = B is meaningless.

Srila Krsna Dvaipayana Veda Vyasa is an incarnation of the lord.From what angle does Veda Vyasa or for that matter Parashurama display the same properties as Sri Visnu?

Mohini.Does She look like Sri Vishnu ??? Does She have properties Like Him.How can She and Laxmipati have any property in common whatsoever ??

Shaivites have always advertised Shankara as DIFFERENT from Vishnu,as INDEPENDENT from Vishnu.

You seem to accept their view than to accept the gosvamis' view that Sri Krsna takes up the form of Sadashiva just as He takes up the form of Nrsingha.

That just makes you short sighted.You BELIEVE that shankara is some completely different tattva.

So Ramanuja and Madhva are foolish as per you. Very well.

There were so many elevated Gaudiya saints who maintained the view that "Durga lives in Vaikuntha".

DO YOU CALL THEM FOOLS LIKE YOU OBVIOUSLY CALL ME IN YOUR MIND ?

No.

There's your answer.

And why the words "petty Jeevatama?" Does being a jiva automatically indicate a position of disprespect?

It does when you call a personality of God or His expansions as a tattva who is under maya.

If memory serves, it was you who stated that the forms of Shiva and Uma were "horrendous." It is strange that on one hand, you criticize other Vaishnava acharyas for taking Shiva to be a jiva, but on the other hand you brazenly call Shiva ugly. This seems like a double standard to me.

I didn't criticise them.Mahatmas have their own reasons....If you think they should all agree with only one siddhanta,there wouldn't have been 4 different doctrines.

This excessively wordy reply seems designed to conceal the fact that you cannot explain how you go from "Maya is a reflection of Yogamaya" to "Durga is a millionth part of an amsha of Radha." One statement does not clearly follow from the other.

fair.

Nor can you really explain how, on one hand, Durga is supposedly "identical" to Krishna, and yet on the other hand, Duga is a millionth part of one of Krishna's energies.

Mahamaya and yogmaya.

Perhaps there is nothing wrong with the concept, and it is merely the language with which you use to explain the concept which is at fault.

precisely.Thank you.I happen to have the exact same view.

I would not say that Durga is identical to Vishnu because this conclusion is not upheld by the shrutis. For instance, in the Kena Upanishad 4.1-4 we learn that the devatas were humbled by their inability to challenge the power of Brahman, and that it was through Uma that they learned who this Brahman is. This indicates that Uma and para Brahman are different.

In the same vein as Sri Krsna is mentioned in the chandogya upanishad as being having obtained the knowledge of Brahm from His 'guru'.Right ??

And to say Krsna is Svayam Bhagavan,the basis of Brahm !!

Besides,

Even not considering Svetasvatara upanishad,there are other upanishads glorifying Shankara.

I do not really understand what you gain by trying to insist that Durga and Vishnu are "identical."

To help others avoid to offense of ever thinking that :"Visnu's energies or even one of them can ever be limited,or not supremely powerful" and continuously try to call Uma-Mahesvara as demigods.

Yes, and Yes-and-no. To me its the same Durga in the same archa vighraha who could be spiritual potency for one and material for another.

 

My opinion is, it is the motivation, desire and intention of the spiritual seeker (sadhak) that matters more than whether Katyayani is Durga or whether SHE is material or spiritual. It is whether WE are materially or spiritually motivated. Nothing can be hidden from the Parabrahma Parameshwar Paramatma in the heart.

 

 

Srimad Bhagvatam 10.22.44

 

Each of the young unmarried girls performed her worship while chanting the following mantra. "O goddess Kātyāyanī, O great potency of the Lord, O possessor of great mystic power and mighty controller of all, please make the son of Nanda Mahārāja my husband. I offer my obeisances unto you."

 

PURPORT by Srila Prabhupad

 

According to various ācāryas, the goddess Durgā mentioned in this verse is not the illusory energy of Kṛṣṇa called Maya but rather the internal potency of the Lord known as Yoga-māyā. The distinction between the internal and external, or illusory, potency of the Lord is described in the Nārada-pañcarātra, in the conversation between Śruti and Vidyā:

......

......

"The Lord's inferior potency, known as Durgā, is dedicated to His loving service. Being the Lord's potency, this inferior energy is nondifferent from Him. There is another, superior potency, whose form is on the same spiritual level as that of God Himself. Simply by scientifically understanding this supreme potency, one can immediately achieve the Supreme Soul of all souls, who is the Lord of all lords. There is no other process to achieve Him. That supreme potency of the Lord is known as Gokuleśvarī, the goddess of Gokula. Her nature is to be completely absorbed in love of God, and through Her one can easily obtain the primeval God, the Lord of all that be. This internal potency of the Lord has a covering potency, known as Mahā-māyā, who rules the material world. In fact she bewilders the entire universe, and thus everyone within the universe falsely identifies himself with the material body."

 

From the above we can understand that the internal and external, or superior and inferior, potencies of the Supreme Lord are personified as Yoga-māyā and Mahā-māyā, respectively. The name Durgā is sometimes used to refer to the internal, superior potency, as stated in the Pañcarātra: "In all mantras used to worship Kṛṣṇa, the presiding deity is known as Durgā." Thus in the transcendental sound vibrations glorifying and worshiping the Absolute Truth, Kṛṣṇa, the presiding deity of the particular mantra or hymn is called Durgā. The name Durgā therefore refers also to that personality who functions as the internal potency of the Lord and who is thus on the platform of śuddha-sattva, pure transcendental existence. This internal potency is understood to be Kṛṣṇa's sister, known also as Ekānaḿśā or Subhadrā. This is the Durgā who was worshiped by the gopīs in Vṛndāvana. Several ācāryas have pointed out that ordinary people are sometimes bewildered and think that the names Mahā-māyā and Durgā refer exclusively to the external potency of the Lord.

......

....

 

PLEASE READ THE PURPORT .

 

 

Hare Krshna

EXCELLENT...Seriously

Raghu,I have two words for you: Svetasvatara Upanishad.

A millionth part of an expansion of Radha....

this statement doesn't mean Radha becomes inferior...How the hell will She become inferior ??

Maya CANNOT GO ANYWHERE NEAR BHAGAVAN.Even Shankara-he is explained as "When Godhead accepts influence of maya" seems misleading...How can God be bewildered by maya ? He may certainly take up a form decorated with snakes and surrounded with ghosts,and act as though He gets angry,but intelligent people are not bewildered.

Ranjeet,

 

First you say Durga and Krishna are identical.

 

Now you say that Druga is a millionth of a portion of Radha.

 

These two positions are not consistent.

Lord Krsna takes up the Caturvyuha forms.One of Them is Sankarsana.

This Lord sankarsana again takes up four more Forms.One of Them is again called Sankarsana.

Of this Person,Lord Mahavishnu,the Purusha,The Primeval Lord,is but a part(amsa).

Now when the we say part of a part of a part of a part of Lord Krsna...do you think we mean that Brahm Sri Krsna is cut four times ??? Or somehow He is made inferior ??? Or He is diluted...His Godhood is diluted ???

No.The Purusha Sukta states This Mahavishnu as the Sole cause of all there is..the Supreme Being..The eternal Purusha.

What to speak of the Ksirodashayi Vishnu,Who is seated as Paramatma ??? He is a part of a part of Mahavishnu.

But still,in geeta,Sri Krsna says,"Ha-Yes,I Myself am seated in everyone's heart."

Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti thakura says that both Sadashiva and Narayana are present as Themselves on the saguna plane as Shiva and Vishnu.Lord Shiva,in this saguna feature,is apparently bewildered by the three modes of maya and foolishly,is thought to be some petty Jeevatma.

Sastras tell us how maya is a reflection of Yogmaya.It is not wrong to say that a millionth part of an amsa of Radha(Durga of Vaikuntha) is Durga of the material world.

But still,the durga of the material world is Mayadevi and identical with Purusha/Bhagavan.

The potency is never seperate from sri Krsna.All potencies of Sri Krsna are supremely powerful(otherwise anyone could have crossed maya).

Maya,the potency is inert,but the Personality-Mayadevi-is like the saguna feature of Yogmaya.As said earlier,the potency is One and has all Her desires fullfilled at once(satyakaama).But She always acts according to the will of Bhagavan.After all Bhagavan is one..There is no fighting between Varaha and Nrsingha.Even if there is,it is leela.

Hey bhaktajan...awesome info...thnx.

I'm not manufacturing anything.

How many forms of God ????

are you serious.

ummmmm,maybe because every generation from 500 years ago witnessed top class mahatmas spring from the same line ?????

jai rama,

Excellent ranjeetmore i thought Radha was the primordial shakti.

Remember You only said that the material potrncy mahamaya and internal potency yogmaya is different.

Durga is a demigoddess.

Brahma samhita mentions durga devi worshipped here and the spiritual one different.

Ok if durga is krishna is according to you the n even the 10 forms of durga is krishna.

Wait the ten tantric goddesses are also there.

Wait there lalita devi.

What about mahalaksmi.

Weve got 22 devis which are equal to krishna.

If prabhupada says demigoddes he meanss it.

The shakts Beleive in formless devi just like shaivs.

For them each devi is same.

What the shaktas or Shaivas(most of them) say is not true now is it.

wow,love you smaranam...

are you from Nimbarkara sampradaya ??

sHANKARA TELLS NARADA IN BRAHM VAIVARTA PURANA

“Please hear, O Narada, and I will tell you the meaning of these mantras. The material world is manifested

by the Lord’s maya potency and other

external potencies. The spiritual world is manifested by the Lord’s chit potency and other internal and

everlasting spiritual potencies. The protector

of these potencies is said to be the gopi Sri Radha, who is Lord Krishna’s beloved. The transcendental goddess

Sri Radha is the direct counterpart of

Lord Sri Krishna. She is the central figure for all the goddesses of fortune. She is the pleasure potency of

Lord Krishna. The wise say that She is

the pleasure potency of Lord Krishna. Durga and the other goddesses in the world of the three modes are a

million-millionth part of one of Her expansions.

She is directly Goddess Maha-Lakshmi and Lord Krishna is Lord Narayana. O best of sages, there is not the

slightest difference between Them.

O best of sages, what more can I say? Nothing can exist without them. This universe made of spirit and matter

together is Their potency. She is Durga

and Lord Hari is Shiva. Lord Krishna is Indra and She is Shachi. She is Savitri and Lord Hari is Brahma.

She is Dhumorna and Lord Hari is Yama. O Narada,

please know that everything is Their potency. Even if I had many hundreds of years, I could not describe all

Their glories.”

Millionth millionth part of which expansion ??? The durgadevi of Vaikuntha.The Durgadevi of Vaikuntha is identical with Radhika just as the Expansions of the Lord are identical with Him.

This is not mayavada.This is sastric knowledge and accepted by the acharyas.

The greatest of Gaudiya vaishnavas or even Nimbarkis accept a certain attribute of Sri Krsna.That of being sajatiya bheda shunya.

This signifies Brahma,Vishnu,Mahesvara,Sarasvati,Rama,Uma etc are indifferent with Lord Sri Krsna.

Sometimes Lord Shankara and even Lord Brahma are accepted as eternal and possessing some attributes of Lord Vishnu that no devata can ever come to possess.For these reasons sometimes Brahma is called indifferent from sri Visnu and Lord Shankara is said to be the same.This doesn't undermine Sri Visnu's position.That is foolish to think.

This is the truth.These things are very complex and i can NEVER SAY I WILL EVER UNDERSTAND THEM FULLY.

Durga is identical to Krishna, as told by Jiva Goswami in this commentary to Brahma Samhita:

"

Durga is also described in Narada-pancaratra, in the following conversation of Sruti and Vidya:

Durga is the supreme goddess. She is an incarnation of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. She is the

transcendental(The person Durga is transcendental) potency of the Lord. She is

manifested from the form of Lord Maha-Vishnu.

Simply by understanding her one immediately attains the Supreme Personality of Godhead. It is not otherwise.

Durga is the personal potency of Lord Krishna, and therefore she is Lord Krishna Himself. For this reason Durga

should not be considered manifested

from a portion of the Lord's illusory potency Maya. This fact is confirmed by the following statement of the

Nirukti:

Even is one continually worships her, Durga is still difficult to understand.

In the Sammohana Tantra, Durga herself declares:

I am Durga. I possess all virtues. I am not different from Sri Radha, the eternal, supreme goddess of fortune.

She is identical with Gokula's queen Sri Radha, who possesses a great treasure of love for Krishna. By her grace

the Supreme Personality of Godhead,

the master of all living entities, is easily understood.

Sometimes Goddess Durga is also described as the supreme controller. This is also correct because there is no

difference between the potencies and

Lord Krishna, the master of all potencies. This is confirmed by the following words of the Gautamiya Tantra:

Krishna is Durga. Durga is Krishna. One who sees that they are different will not become liberated from the

cycle of repeated birth and death.

"

Digambara: What is this visnu-maya?

Advaita: In the Candi-mahatmya of the Markandeya Purana (81.40), visnu-maya is described, mahamaya hareh saktir

yaya sammohitam jagat:

“The potency of Bhagavan by which the entire world is bewildered is known as mahamaya.”

Digambara: Then who is the goddess I know as Mother Nistarini?

Advaita: She is Sri Hari’s external potency known as visnu-maya.

Digambara opened his book on tantra and said, “Look, it states in tantra-sastra that my divine mother is

consciousness personified. She possesses full

will and she is beyond the three qualities of material nature, yet she is the support of those three qualities.

Your visnu-maya is not free from the

influence of the modes of nature, so how can you equate your visnu-maya with my mother? This type of fanaticism

on the part of the Vaisnavas really

irritates me. You Vaisnavas have blind faith.”

Advaita: Brother Digambara, please don’t be angry. After so many days you have seen me again. If I say ‘the maya potency of

Lord Visnu’, how have I become small-minded? Lord Visnu is the all-knowing Supreme Personality of Godhead.

All that exists is His potency. The word

‘potency’ does not mean a substance. Rather it means the quality that a substance possesses. Therefore the

statement that a potency is the root of all

existence goes counter to the truth. A potency cannot exist apart from its substance. An original substance

with a spiritual form must first be accepted.

After all, the commentary on Vedanta-sutra declares:

“The potency and the possessor of the potency are not different.”

The meaning, then, is that the potency does not exist apart from its substance. The only true substance is the

Supreme Personality of Godhead, the master

of potencies. The nature of the potency is either to be a quality of the Supreme Lord, or submissive to His will.

When it is said that the potency has

pure consciousness, that means that because the potency and the master of potencies are not different, therefore,

like the master of potencies, the potency

also has a form of spiritual consciousness, has desires that are at once fulfilled, and is beyond the touch of

the three modes. It is not a mistake to say

these things. Will and consciousness are qualities of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. By itself, the potency

does not possess will, but rather it

carries out the will of the Supreme. For example, you have power, and by Your will, your potencies act. If you

say, ‘the power acted’, then that means

that the possessor of the power was actually behind the action. To say that ‘the power acted’ is only to use a

figure of speech. In truth, the Supreme

Personality of Godhead has only one potency. When she performs spiritual actions, she is called spiritual

potency, and when she performs material actions,

she is called the material potency, or maya. The Vedas (Svetasvatara Upanisad 6.8) explain:

“The potency of the Supreme is manifested in many different ways.”

The potency that manifests the three modes is the material potency. She creates and destroys the material

universes. Those are her duties. In the Puranas

and Tantras this potency is called by many names, such as Visnu-maya, Maha-maya, and Maya. Allegorically she is

also called ‘the mother of Brahma, Visnu

and Shiva”, ‘the killer of Sumbha and Nisumbha’, and other like names that describe her different activities. As

long as he remains deeply enmeshed in

material consciousness, the soul is under her power. When he attains pure spiritual knowledge, the soul can

understand the nature of his original

spiritual form. Then he is freed from the ropes of Maya. Then he is under the power of the spiritual potency.

Then he becomes happy.

Digambara: Are you under the power of one of these potencies, or are you not?

Advaita: Yes. We are also a potency. We are ‘jiva-shakti’, individual souls. When we become free from the ropes

of the maya potency, we are in the power

of the spiritual potency.

Digambara: Then you are also a sakta, a worshipper of the potency.

Advaita: Yes. The Vaishnavas are naturally saktas. We are the servants of Sri Radhika, who is the spiritual

potency. Under Her patronage we worship and

serve Lord Krishna. Who is more of a sakta than we? I don’t see any difference between the saktas and the

Vaishnavas. They who do not take shelter of

the spiritual potency, but only take shelter of the material potency Maya may be saktas, but they are not

Vaishnavas. They are materialists. In the

Narada-pancaratra, Goddess Durga explains:

“O Krishna, I am Radha, who stays on Your chest during the rasa dance in Vrindavan forest.”

Thus from Durga-devi’s words we can understand that the Lord does not have two potencies. There is only one

potency, who manifests Herself as the

spiritual potency Radhika and the material potency Visnu-maya. When the potency is free from the material modes,

she is called the spiritual potency,

and when she is within the sphere of the material modes, she is called the material potency.

***

It is only imperative for GAUDIYA VAISHNAVAS follow and accept the Gosvami's conclusion and that of Advaita,a pure Gaudiya saint.

Actually,the gosvamis and the earlier Gaudiya saints were quite clear about these truths.

Durga actually exists in Vaikuntha as Yogmaya.She has Her own dvipa just as Sadashiva is residing within Vaikuntha.

P.S: Not that i want to prove anything...but it was very funny that digambara had to open his tantra books now and then while advaita went on firing.(lol.)It's all there..in the minds of the mahatmas.

i'm happy for you..it takes a lot to apologise

Radhe radhe.

deity worship is un necessary.But if the sadhaka has somehow an attraction to deity and has somehow acquired faith that deity is Sri Krsna Himself,he should follow it without any hesitation.

i meant Ramkrishna,melvin,not SP

seriously,why don't you'll ignore this cheap person ??

The vedic version makes one thing very clear..The Supreme Truth,The primeval cause,the source of everything that be,HAS INTELLIGENCE and thus He is Supremely able to WILL,to DESIRE.

Further,since the Supreme Brahm has superexcellent energies,He brings about the creation,maintenanc and destruction of the universe by His mere will,although remaining in one place.This apparent impossibility that 'the intense task of creating the universe without any toil' is further explained by the vedas.

The vedas counts 8 qualities of the Supreme Brahm.Two of those qualities are: Satyakaama and satyasankalpa.

With Satyasankalpa,The supreme Lord performs all extraordinary tasks without any difficulty.

Sa icchan cakre.

The Supreme Primeval Lord had a desire.

He smiled.

By His mere will,He set Maya into transformation and created millions and millions of brahmandas.

Infinite Jeevatmas emanated from His divine self,as though,sparks from a huge fire.

The Supreme Godhead,being present in one place,simultaneously took up infinite forms as He entered each and every atom of this mayic creation.

..This is the version of the vedas.

I didn't say he is avtaar.