sant

The lingam is the simplest and most ancient symbol of Shiva, especially of Parasiva, God beyond all forms and qualities. Use some logic or maybe common sense The fact that kashmir shaivism teaches non dualism that means everything is brahman.

Well do you know this is not a nationalist forum,there are more foreigners here in this thread than indians. The indian people are here too busy with jyotish and mantra tantra The vedic astrology is the site which is full of indian and i think there are 97% only indians there. So you think what the indians here are interested in. if youre a truly spiritual you will consider all beings as equal god resides in all whether they are abrahamic religion or pakistanis or anybody that is real sprituality that is real advait which can be seen in less people.

You have forgotten about the injustices of the british,the arabs worth of money jewels diamonds stolen by the british forcibly and cunningly both,the inhuman constitutional policies which led india to famines, poverty slavery,The bloody jallianwala bhag , the forcibly usage if indian soldiers in war,the injustice and inhuman treatment begeted indians be he a soldier farmer teacher businessman anybody, the use of divide and rule which led to bloodshed during 1947,seem to be more lovable for you, Before the british every person in india had his own land,there was less poverty,people were self sufficient and were hindus.They were well off.

Lingayats believe in a monotheistic world where Linga or Parashiva the supreme god and self are one and the same. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lingayatism Although Kashmir Shaivism and Advaita Vedanta both teach nondualism, the non-dualism of Kashmir Shaivism is quite different from that of Advaita Vedanta. Essential to this difference is Advaita Vedanta's proposition that this universe is untrue and unreal, that it is a false projection of maya. This theory is completely opposed to the Kashmir Shaiva theory of reality. To counter this proposition Kashmir Shaivism argues that, if Shiva is real, how could an unreal substance emerge from something that is real? http://www.kashmirshaivism.org/introduction.html I have heard it from baba avdhut shivanand also who is a great advait shaiv here.He also says the self and shiva is same,shivohum aham brahamasmi www.shivyog.com

Shaivism is advait , maybe not in true advatin way but anyway it is advait.. Differences are that advait say everything is brahman Shaivism says everything is shiva(param shiva not rudra dev) Param shiva doesnt have a form. Shiva ,rudra and jeev are regarded as same in shaivism. They are disguised advaits. Havent you heard shivohum -i am shiva If that does not amount to advait then please tell how.

agreed

Kali upasak intentions here are to prove tantrics as vedik and to equate shaktisms countless devis with krishna.Isnt that true sir

JAYA SHRI VISHNU Ok sorry then if you think your right here then suit yourself. i said it as i regarded you someone close but you do as you like. JAI SIYA RAM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abhishekam

Why are you after abrahamic religion. Why are you against gaudiyas or whom are you against guadiyas or against the philosophy.I think you are not liking the words and ways of gaudiyas around you.If you ever come to india ill show you real vaishnavs. IT is because people go to the extreme and start unnessary critisizing that problem arises. You have no quarrel with shiv bhaktas but you certainly are quarelling with gaudiyas. Dont mind sir but you have got stuck up in non vedik siddha pranali and tanric texts thats why you are facing problems. You are too into iskcon gurus or gaudiya gurus. Only iskcon are not vaishnavs get that straight.

yes so what that mohini was also krishna shiva fell for krishna only. And shiva will fall for krishna's maya because he is subservient to krishna. But he is lord of jivas.Have a read at brahma samhita youll understand. In the bhagwat it is said that one should consider vishnu and shiva the same otherwise there wont be peace in a persons mind. It has been mentioned in many places where shiva has granted liberation. So that is why i have said it. But he works under the will of krishna.

Prabuphadji never specially said shakt or shaiv as ive never read it in any of his books as i can remember now,he said mayavad. So you can guess the answer. if you ask me then yes. and as for liberation it has been clearly said bhaja govindam. But shiva can also grant liberation no doubt.

oh oh sir wrong where did you get this from.

Shiva considering him as god is no problem as he has the qualities of ishvara Shiva to be considered as demigod is also no wrong as he is second to vishnu.

The shaivist beleive the param shiva which is same as brahman as everything.The shiva (brahman) desires to create therefore the world is created.Everyone shiva,param shiva and the self are equal and one as according to them.So it is advait philosophy only brahman is referred to shiva.The shakt is also the same only they call the brahman as maa.

Prabhupada ji refers to shiva as demigod as he is subserviant to vishnu as per vaishnavites. But he is still a part of the trinity and in narada purana and bhagwad it is written shiva brahma and vishnu all should be regarded as same. He iss god for vaishnavs also as they are lord of jivas. But the fact that he is second to vishnu that is why shiva is mentioned as demigod as there cannot be two gods and that makes hinduism polytheism.As for devi she is half of shiva therefore she is of equal position to shiva. In many places there is also written that shiva should not be compared to vishnu as he is second to him. If you ever read the shaiv philosophy param shiva (brahman) is mentioned to be the cause of everything. thus he is same as brahman. You take it as shiva and devi are manifestations of brahman, Only vishnu is brahman as told by all jagadgurus including shankaracharya.

MAY I ASK

edit

yes please dont go by these tantras and shaktas remember my situation. These texts are mayavi just like maya and are deluding. Thats my opinion.

The spiritual durga is diferent from material durga. WHy are you quoting from tantra no point because it has been proved false.

no did ramakrishna say this you only are saying this. Sahjiya is not vaishnavism,serving the lord is not copying him and doing raaas lila.The definition of vaishnav is given in puraans as i can remeber it means one who serves the lord.

my be shakt nonsense again. Just like brahma vishnu mahesh turning into women. to your information tantrics are sahajiyas right so they have sex and do raas just like shiv shakti practices.This is not even vedic. I dont think you shakts or ramakrishna valued krishna bhakti. In his opinion he equated demidoddes kali with brahman ive already told his bhakti which he did to remove sexual thoughts.The highest form of prema to krishna was to be done to remove sexual thoughts.His bhakti- 3 days he served ram like hanuman then ram merged into him, practised islam mohamed merged into him,etc. you know all this. something might have been written wrong about him maybe some tantrics may have written something false..tantrics and sahajis their ways are not very good.

sorry sorry what do you mean by this?

thanks i may i have swallowed this. But i heard a person on babas show also speaking. here in india colgate pepsodent is advertised quite much especially showing dentists using them and due to unstrict laws the warning is never given

Ramakrishna acknowledged the left-hand tantric path, though it had "undesirable features", as one of the "valid roads to God-realization", he consistently cautioned his devotees and disciples against associating with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramakrishna Sorry not exactly praise but acknowledge so you cannot say it is not tantra. tell me what is in right hand path of tantra? What of dus mahavidyas they are from here?