Yogkriya

The conclusion can be either 1 or 2. In that same post I mentioned that no 2. is right. I adid not say anything about 1. Learn to read properly first.

Its not a matter or "learning" to read Rag! Its a matter of acceptance!

When I use the term "servant" it does not make someone less. But it shows their Love for that personality.

Yes so true Yogesh.

If you are going away to a forest to meditate I wish you all the Best in attaining the mercy of Lord Shiva and If I could ask a Little favour.....If Lord Shiva may give me a little of his mercy that I may become a better devotee and follow Sirla Prabhupadas teachings without causing Vaishnava Aparaadh.

I used to go to retreats with my Guru to forests in the mountains, temples at night (all night meditations on the deity closing ourselves inside the altar room), but not anymore. My room is my cave for meditation that I can lock and get some mercy. I will ask for some mercy for you too. Follow SP if he is your Guru or inspiration. Don't lose faith in Yogeshwar Shri Krishna.

Yes sometimes I can become emotional But what to do? I am a personalist (not impersonalist) and as you are very much attracted to Lord Shiva, I am very much attracted to Lord Krsna and All Vishnu Avatars and All Dear Devotees. But onething I will not allow my emotions to cause Vaishnava Aparaadh.

 

I am still learning and growing and maybe by the mercy of all Bhaktas (Krsna or Shiva) I may reach my goal of becoming a servant of the servant of my most beloved object of worship Lord Krsna.

 

So I ask for forgiveness if I have offended You or any other devotees.

Wishing You all the Best in your Sadhana

Where there is love, devotion and affection, desire for intectual warfare is lost! And that is the only reason why Bhakti and devotional love has been considered as high. Lord Shiva says in Shiv Samhita to Parvati that Yoga is the highest of all forms of sadhna, BUT it should be given to a Bhakta only and this shows the importance of bhakti and devotion. Even if a Yogi attains supernatural powers, he needs bhakti to keep them controlled and devoted. I wish you all the best in your loving devotional service and sadhna! Om Namah Shivaya!!

By the way, there is no SadaShiva etc. which some schools have manufactured.

Just like Vishvambar Mishra's being avatara of Krishna?

Vashishtha Rishi - the great kul Guru of Rama worships Sadashiva devata.

All these verses are concocted and must be rejected as it opposes Sruti.

But you said - Srutis are fallible.

Nonesense and proven wrong by the same Shatapatha Brahmana verses.

 

Not really. I don't recognize this as the highest authority.

Raghu,

So one Shatapatha Brahmana verse replaces everything else in the Vedic spiritual culture as well as at least 50 thousand years of Vedic history???

I understand your eagerness to 'prove' Lord Shiva a mere Demi-God. And address him as some sort of a "being".

BUT, you neverthless failed to explain the real life examples of the high souled Shiva devotees down the ages that I mentioned in previous mails. You simply brushed off the whole Mahabharata as a mere concocted nonsense!! This is not accepted! Not accepted anywhere!

My question is still valid, why would Rama, Krishna worship Lord Shiva with so much devotion? If one had to follow you, then we will have to throw away some of the Vedic scriptures. Since Srutis contradict each other and are fallible, then modern day books written by people like Prabhupada should have no meaning at all? How can they ever be authentic? What about chaitanya charitamrita? what is it based on? It is neither Veda, nor Upanishad, nor anything!

What now? Why do you follow that then? Where is the logic here? You seem to impound some through vociferating against shrutis and Puranas. If you don't accept puranas, then stop reading SB. If you do, then include Shiva Mahapurana too. The same Brahma was punished by Shiva and accept for Pushkar Raj in Rajasthan he is worshipped nowhere! Are you aware of this?

The origin of Shiva is not known to Vishnu and Brahma (according to Shiva Mahapurana), since he is without a beginning or an end. he is Swayambhu.

How do you explain the greatest of the Rishis like Upmanyu, Vashishtha, Vishwamitra, Kanad, Pulatsya, Atri, Bognath, Agstya......????

If we had to follow your explaination, then all of them were men of small intelligence? They were all the biggest Shiva devotees!! Further, Vama devata is the Rishi of Shiv sadhna too.

And finally Rama! AND KRISHNA!! And Arjuna! Why would they worship and Shiva? umm... any answers to that?

You failed to answer before anything on this. And none of the GBCs could answer it too.

I guess all you can imply is that Shiva is worshipped for material gains? This is so not true. Sadly you are not able to see both sides of the same coin - Shiva-Vishnu.

And lastly, the conclusion you came out with in deciding Shiva's position as a mere Demi-God is false. Simply because, Shiva is impossible to undersand with some intellectual debate and this is what you are trying to do. Srimad Bhagwatam explains nicely - that he can be understood only in the state of deep trance (Turiya awastha or Nirvikalpa Samadhi), not in the state of sleep, dream, emotional turmoil, etc.

Hari Aum,

 

Aum Nama Shivaya,

 

If you have read the Shatapata Brahmana verses properly, you will not get confused like this.

 

In Shatapatha Brahmana, BrahmA gives his child names one after another when his child cries and claims to be sinful (anapahatapaapma). The names are Rudra, Sarva, Pasupati, Ugra, Usana, Bhava, Mahadeva, Ishana. All the above names given to the child indicates that the child is unmistakably Lord Shiva, Umapati. There is no single reason to think otherwise in this particular verse.

 

Now it is also important to note that here this child(who is Lord Shiva) claims to be sinful (anapahatapaapma) in nature when born and cries and requests BrahmA to cleanse his sins by giving above names.

By putting both points together we can conclude Lord Shiva is not Brahman or supreme.

All we know in Svetasvatara Upanishad is that, a being named RudrA is mentioned. Yet this upanishad mentions RudrA giving birth to BrahmA.

 

So the conclusion should be

 

1. Srutis contradict each other and hence Srutis are fallible

2. Shvetasvatara Upanishad mentions a different being by the name RudrA.

No 2 is the right conclusion. Also Svetatara mentions about this being RudrA possessing 1000s of heads, etc. which is similar to Purusa Sukta Verses. We also know that Purusa Sukta verses refer to Lord of Shri and Hree from Tatiriya Aranyaka.

 

Also we know from Bhallaveya Sruti and Visvakarma Sukta of Rig Veda that all the names of Devatas belong to Narayana. Besides it is well known that Isavasya Upansihad refers to Yajna(avatara of Narayana) as beyong impurities.

 

Hence RudrA in Svetasvatara upanishad refers to Narayana, while Umapati RudrA is (anapahatapaapma) as per Shatapatha Brahmana.

Therefore all your claims are iirelevant and illogical.

Agreed Atanu. This evokes only offenses. Nothing comes out of God positioning agenda that the Gaudiyas follow. Fact still remains to be true that without any self realization or elevation of one's spiritual level, there is no liberation. What planet krishna lives or shiva lives or whether it is ten miles higher or lower is irrelevant unless one becomes qualified to reach there. And qualification can come only by sadhna, not by plain book reading or vedantic discussions. God is also the highest rasa, and rasa can only be experienced - not debated. Nobody was able to touch him by debates.

When Arjuna had to seek help from Lord Shiva, he went into a forest and did sadhna for many days. With proper knowledge of mantra, pranayama, bandha, mudras, shaktipaat and meditation. Krishna himself reveals this kriya in Bhagwat Gita. But, maybe instead he should've gone for book distribution or nama-hata?

Before I came in contact with them, I was neutral and didn't know this God positioning thing. But slowly I became a bit defensive about it with a lot of provocation. not good. But my position on Shiva and Vishnu (Rama, Krishna) is clear. I'm a Shiva devotee, but worship both and see the closest relation between the two to a point that they are no more two but one.

SadaShiva creates as Brahma, sustains as Vishnu and destroys as Rudra.

One may also think the same for Vishnu. Here all the arguments end personally for me in this respect.

Thanks for your messages and vital quotes. My best wishes and appreciation.

Nice logic.

 

But dear Yogikriya Come out of here and meditate or go anywhere else, or they will succeed to induce Krishna dvesh in you and that should not happen.

 

They have forgotten the story of destruction of yadus and they have not read SB fully: or they would see:

 

From SB

 

31. O Lord Girisa, since the impersonal Brahman effulgence is transcendental to the material modes of goodness, passion and ignorance, the various directors of this material world certainly cannot appreciate it or even know where it is. It is not understandable even to Lord Brahma, Lord Visnu or the King of heaven, Mahendra.

 

 

 

The light of cognition within everyone is Lord Shiva -- 'shivoadvaitam Turiya' as it is called in Mandukya Upanishad. Some people harm their own Self (unknowingly of course). This is called ego.

ummm.. lol ! Yes I can see why.

Namaskar Raghu,

 

Rudra is progenitor of Hiraynagarbha and not son of Brahma. What you say is like saying that a wall was the progenitor of Nrisimha. And please note that Rudra is prayed to open up the Buddhi. No wonder that some intellects are clogged.

Only great personalities can understand the Shiva-Krishna; Shiva Rama relationship. It is very special. And my emphasis has been on recognizing the beauty of it, rather than keep up the God positioning agenda.

And no, I don't dismiss this as "another story".

Shiva burned Kama Deva to ashes. Shiva cannot be affected by Kama. So he cannot be thought of as a simple man's lust forcing him to indulge into mundane sexual activity! Its a sin to think like that. Shiva sees things from the eye of yoga and not from an ordinary materialistic view. He is also Ardhnarishwara who has complete realized male and female energies within. His relation with Mohini avatara of Vishnu is beyond understanding of ordinary souls. Just like Krishna's stealing the clothes of gopis is NOT to be understood by a viewpoint of sexual lust.

Shiva says: "I'm in the heart of Vishnu and Vishnu is in my heart ever. This is the highest secret and no one knows it." He further adds - "those devotees of mine who condemn Vishnu or devotees of Vishnu who condemn me go to the low lying hell called 'Raurav'."

There is no question of his being "servant" or "dasa" of Krishna or Krishna being a dasa. This relation is of greatest affection and love. It is to be understood and accepted as it is without perching one above the other.

Simply because we don't have the knowledge of the self to start with. And we want to understand the Shiva Tatva. This is not possible. Self realization is important.

:To Yogi Prabhu...

 

On the point of your quote " His maya permeates the Universe, but he Himself is not affected by Maya nor is he affected by any other three gunas"

 

There are many instances in the pastimes of Lord Shiva where he becomes enraged or attracted.

I am not sure if you recall the incident where when the Devtas And Asuras were churning the Ocean for Nectar. After the nectar was churned and by the grace of Lord Shiva who was asked to remove the poison, There was a a quarel between The 2 sides over who should have the nectar. So Lord Vishnu appeared in the attractive female form as Mohini to take the nectar away from the demons. When Lord Shiva saw the attractive form of the Lord Immediately he lost all composure and ran after her even though Mother Parvati was present.

 

Only great lerned personalities will understand the great relationship between Lord Shiva And Lord Vishnu.

 

Is this just another "story" that you would like to dismiss....

and many other "stories"????

Please becareful of making Vaishnava Aparaadh by blaspheming against Lord Shiva also called Mahadev. There was also a similar sampradaya (lineage) like the Gaudiya Lineage we follow called the Rudra Sampradaya.

 

I am sure other more knowladgable devotees could give more information about the Rudra samradaya (lineage)

 

Thank you for your answer Yogesh. Makes sense.

Also since Vedas are the highest authority, what's the need of books like CC and SB?

If you really believe Vedas to be highest authority, then read those quotes as well, posted by Atanu from Rig Veda and Sama Veda hailing Lord Rudra / Shiva!! Why would you reject them? They are Vedas alright!!

Om Namah Shivaya!

Jai Gurudev!

You could give no answer to all I've written, simply dismissing it as emotional rant!

What Rudra are you talking about? There are thousands of Rudras!!!

Brahma says that about one Rudra, but look what Brahma says elsewhere while worshipping Lord Siva!!! He hails Shiva as the top most deity to be worshiped and recognizes him as the master of the universe too!! You don't quote that! Why not?

Are you really talking about Lord Sadashiva? We are talking about Shiva here! I dare you show me one place where Krishna - your top most object of worship says that Lord Sadashiva is a mere "Demi-God"! Krishna never said that. He lived on this planet for about 112 to 125 years according to different souces. Since he didn't say that, you bring up other scriptures to back up your nonsense. But when it comes to Krishna, you only quote what Krishna said. In other cases, you simply ignore even what Krishna says. This clarifies your sect's position as non-Vedic. You do not follow Vedic sadhna systems.

If you are a Hare Krishna then the reading of Vedas is not for you. Because - Prabhupada didn't instruct on that. Then you are in direct opposition to your own lineage Guru and this discredits your statement. You are out of line.

Let's see about your rant now. Just suppose for one micro second that Lord Shiva is a "Demi-God". Now you follow the Bhagwat Gita where Devkinandan says not to follow Demi-Gods. Prabhupada translates - "men of inferior knowledge worship 'Demi-Gods' ". Then why would this Krishna worship Lord Shiva - a so claimed "Demi-God" with so much sincerity and devotion??? This would now prove that Krishna was a man of inferior knowledge? He was if I have to follow your logic!!

Again Krishna was born of Devaki. Why don't you replace Krishna idol with Devaki on your altar then?

Further more, I would like the GBC members to issue a statement that Mahabharata is concocted!!! This is the stupidest emotional desperate statement that I am hearing from someone who wants to prove their point. Maybe I should write a letter asking Bhaktivaibhava GoSwami or Gopal Krishna GoSwami for their opinion on this..

By the way, the same translated English version of Mahabharata was also given to me by a GBC member from the US.

If this is mistranslated, then where is the real translation. Why couldn't Prabhupada translate this? Because this glorifies Lord Shiva? And now you have problem with this? Problem - where Krishna himself glorifies Shiva?

Again, if I have to believe you, then Narsimha dev is below the pillar position from which it appeared! ;-) So we can assume that the Pillar is greater than Narsimhadev. Let's worship the stone pillar instead then.

Instead of deciding who woke up or not, you must contend with the Sruti verse which states very clearly that Lord Shiva is a demogod and is below BrahmA in position. Note that the verses are from Vedas(Sruti) and I dare you explain this verse, where RudrA(Lord Shiva) himself states that he is sinful.

 

Can you give any logical arguments without any personal attacks.

 

Also all your statements in Mahabaratha are concocted or mistranslated simply based on the vedic verse quoted from Shatapatha Brahmana.

 

The point to note is that SRUTI is a higher authority than Itihaasas.

 

Hence RudrA Deva is a demigod period. Your emotional rants are irrelevant.

I think you are confusing the yugas. Shiva showed the universal form much before Krishna and this was not in Treta Yuga.

He showed the form to Rama. Krishna did say this universal form is seen by none before (except for himself). Now the question would arise that if Shiva showed Krishna (then in Rama incarnation), then how can Krishna display the same form to Arjuna?

To know this, one has to understand the real relation between Hari and Shiva. This is the most intimate and closest relation in all the universes. And is not to be understood by those who blasphemy other sampradayas or are against Shiva or Vaishnava. Shiva gita and Samhita clearly state this relation in Lord Shiva's own words.

Fortunately enough for me, I've accepted this Shiva-Vishnu relation and don't feel putting down any of them, as it is way to hell.

Lord Shiva's being the 11th avatara as Hanumana to help and serve Rama is also mentioned in Shiv Gita. Read it.

Now here is the clincher. You mentioned that Lord Siva showed the universal form to Lord Rama.....Well lets see what Gito Upanishad says:-

 

 

CHAPTER 11 TEXT 6

pasyadityan vasun rudran

asvinau marutas tatha

bahuny adrsta-purvani

pasyascaryani bharata

pasya - see; adityan - the twelve sons of Aditi; vasun - the eight Vasus

rudran - the eleven forms of Rudra; asvinau - the two Asvins;

marutah - the forty nine Maruts ( demigods of wind); tatah - also;

bahuni - many; adrsta - that you have not heard or seen; purvani - before; pasya - there see; ascaryani - all the wonderful; bharata - O best of the Bharatas.

 

 

Now it is said many of the forms shown by Lord Krsna when he exhibited his Universal form was not seen or heard before. If Lord Shiva had shown the universal form during Treta Yuga how is it that Lord Krsna states that no one has seen or heard of these forms before in the Dwarpa Yuga????

 

Yes Shiva says this to Rama in shiv Gita too. You may not believe it, but I still suggest you get a copy and read it devotionally. It is right there in the Padma Puran, that SP quoted much.

 

CHAPTER 10 TEXT 22

 

vedanam sama-vedo'smi

devanam asmi vasavah

indriyanam manas casmi

bhutanam asmi cetana

vedanam - of all the Vedas; sama-vedah - the Sama-veda; asmi - I am

devanam - of all demigods; asmi - I am; vasavah - heavenly kings;

indriyanam - of all the senses; manah - mind; ca - also; asmi - I am;

bhutanam - of all living entities; asmi - I am; cetana - the living force;

 

CHAPTER 10 TEXT 23

rudranam sankaras casmi

vitteso yaksa - raksasam

vasunam pavakas casmi

meruh sikharinam aham

rudranam - of all the Rudras; sankarah - Lord Siva; ca - also; asmi - I am

vittesah - the lord of treasury ; yaksa-raksasam - of the Yaksas and Raksasas; vasunam - of the vasunam; pavakah - fire; ca - also; asmi - I am; meruh - Meru; sikharinam - of all mountains; aham - I am.

 

..oops someone just woke up in the US to decide the position of Lord Shiva!

Lord Shiva who while blinks an eyelid - several of Brahma's nights pass... One Brahma's day is the complete cycle of all yugas.. Now we have someone who can finally give a verdict on Lord Shiva. Great!!

This can be decided by someone who knows Shiva.

And as stated in the Mahabharata, no one except Krishna knew Shiva at the time. Now the time is more degraded. If you are a Prabhupada disciple, then Prabhupada definitely is NO authority on Lord Shiva!

Secondly, if quotes from Mahabharata are to be rejected, then you will have to reject the whole story of the Pandavas as concocted. And you will have to dismiss Bhagwat Gita itself as concocted. Bhagwat Gita is just a part of Mahabharata!!! Rigveda or SamaVeda don't talk about the Pandavas either.

Further, you will have to reject the exhistence of Radha as a Vedic character. That nullifies your claim that Gaudiyas and Iskcon are propagating Vedic culture. The only mention of Radha that one of your fellow devotees could show me was in the so called Amala Purana Bhagwatam. That too at just one place. And the translation and purport were wrong. 'Aradhita' was translated as "mentioning of Radha in a concealed way since the author fell in to a trance as soon as he pronounced the word Radha." Of course this is a lot of speculation, since the author couldn't fall into a trance by remembering Lord Krishna himself, Lord Rama or Shiva but fell into a trance by merely saying Radha. This explaination is at the most laughable.

Furthermore you will have to reject a lot more things that you consider Vedic if everything is to be understood and conculded in such a speculative manner.

Shiva is not a Demi God to start with. This Demi God propaganda comes from the gaudiya kitchen.

If you reject Krishna's worship of Mahadeva as GOD and begetting a son from his boon and mercy then you definitely are in illusion. This is a proven fact widely accepted. Umm.. but the Gaudiyas live in their own special world though, and nothing seems to ever bring them up or out of it.

If you reject Krishna's taking Pashupat Diksha (initiation) from the great sage Upmanyu Rishi, then again you are at your liberty to do so.

You can also reject Rama's worshipping Shiva at Rameshwaram and Rama's worshipping Shiva after receiving Virja Diksha from Agastya Muni. Nobody rejects the authority of Agastya. You may also reject altogether the Valmiki Ramayana and guess what? You can reject the greatest Rishi that history has known - Vishwamitra!! You can reject Vishwamitra's words spoken to Rama who in his previous incarnation as Vamadeva worshipped Shiva too.

Further more you can reject the illustrous Queen Kunti who was a staunch Shiva devotee. If you happen to go to India to a place called Bhojpur, you can still see the 21 feet tall Shiva Linga that Kunti used to worship. From its height you can imagine the size of that great Queen. You can also reject the austerities of Queen Gandhari, another staunch Shiva devotee who at the end of Mahabharat war cursed Krishna that his generation will end in genocide. And this happened indeed. You can also reject queen Rukmini - the dear wife of Krishna who was going to worship at the Shiva temple before her marriage when Krishna came to abduct her. The tradition was to go to the Shiva temple to worship Shiva before any auspicious and important event in life.

Yes you can reject any quotes from Mahabharata!! You can take only those ones that you can understand and believe. Others you can reject - even though the speaker of the text is Krishna himself!! Even though the speaker of the text is Bhishma. Even though the speaker of the text is the Lord himself. Doesn't matter. Because when you become a part of a sect, your mind is controlled by its shortmindedness.

BUT, I fail to understand that if you so staunchly follow Bhagwat Gita which is just a part of Mahabharata, then why do you quote Padma Purana and not accept Shiva Gita which is also a part of it!! Do you accept Puranas in parts? or at convenience?

Now why would someone concoct verses in mahabharata to be in direct opposition to Vedas?? I can't see the logic behind your speculation at all.

If Narsimha appeared out of a wall, does this mean that he was born out of a wall?? This is the speculation. If you read the Shiva Mahapurana carefully and read the time of Shiva's marriage to Parvati, he was asked his Gotra! I guess it may not be of importance to you since (if you are American) you may not have any Gotra at all! But Shiva says his father is Brahma, then he is asked, who is his grandfather? Shiva says Vishnu! And again he is asked who is his great garadfather? He replies that he himself is his greatgrandfather. I would not go into quoting exact phrases from Shiva Purana here. But this is what we accept. If you belong to a sect that is essentially driven by sakhi/gopi mood concentrating on Krishna alone then you can talk about Krishna, but you can't be an authority on Shiva / Rudra!

Shiva resides in the hearts of Gods, as quoted by Atanu in a previous message somewhere.

Further, if you believe Shiva as "Evil" (you are quoting this to imply it) and this gets your spiritual life into trouble, then you shoul give instances where Shiva/Rudra is evil. What happened to all his benevolent forms that protect his devotees? What happened to all his wonderful lilas that are even rare for Gods to witness? Rudra is beyond your understanding!! Krishna recites 1008 names of Shiva to please him. Now was Krishna pleasing and worshipping evil? Where is your logic man? There is a height to fanaticism!

Read again the appearance of the fire linga that permeated all the universes that neither Brahma or Vishnu could understand. That is Rudra, that is Shiva, that is Mahadeva, he is Adi deva!! He is not Visvambhar Mishra nor Prabhupada. Shiva is Mahakaal! Beyond the boundaries of time and space. His maya permeates the universes, but he himself is not affected by any maya nor is affected by any of the three gunas.

Also, you quoted Veda, but you don't read any!!! Prabhupada never allowed his disciples to carry extensive Vedic studies. On the contrary he instructed people to read ONLY literature translated by him and him alone. So again you are in direct opposition to your lineage, belief. Another double standard.

Conclusively, you can ignore this message all together and move on with your life believing Shiva is evil and Mahabharat is concocted story. No offenses. But if you simply come up to a site to inflict offenses, then that's not all that fair.

Om Namah Shivaya !!!

Lord Shiva is most definitely a Demigod.

 

The quoted verses from Mahabharata are to be rejected as concocted or included in Mahabarata for the simple fact that these verses are in direct opposition to Veda Pramanas.

 

Shatapatha Brahmana (6.1.3.3-20) clearly state that RudrA being born of BrahmA. In addition, RudrA in these verses cries and asks BrahmA to eradicate his sins by giving him names. Thereafter BrahmA gives RudrA seven names as UgrA, RudrA etc.

 

6.1.3.9

tam prajApatirabraviit | kumaara kíM rodiSi yachrámaattápasó 'dhi jaato 'siíti so& 'braviidánapahatapaapmaa vaá asmyáhitanaamaa naama ma dhehiíti tásmaatputrásya jaatásya naáma kuryaatpaapmaánamevaa&sya tadápahantyápi dvitiíyamápi tRtiíyamabhipUrvámevaa&sya tátpaapmaánamápahanti

 

Rudra is anapahatapaapmaa i.e. Rudra is not freed from EVIL

In Ishavasyaupanishad, Lord Narayana (Yajna an avatara of Narayana )is explained as without any doshas or evil.

 

Hence by this verse alone(Veda being the highest paramana or authority), RudrA Deva is not the Supreme being.

No, with the aprori view that you take the Vedas become a bunch of contradictory verses. For instance (aitareya brahmana 1.1.1)

Yes so you don't read the Vedas.

"agnirvai devaanamavamo viShNuH paramaH"

Agni is the lowest of all deities and Vishnu is the highest.

 

The first chapter of Brahma-sutra deals with the apparent contradictions in the scriptures. What you term as contradictions are not really so, and have been dealt by the Acharyas in their works e.g. Sripad Ramanujacharya in his Vedarthasangraha deals with the pUrvapaksha that apaurusheya vedas have contradictions like different deities being extolled in different hymns, and then explains that all these actually refer to Vishnu alone. Similarly Sripad Madhva deals with this Brahma-sutra-bhasya and all his other works where he establishes that Vishnu alone is sarva-shabda-vachya. Indeed the vishvakarma sUkta says that Vishnu gives His Names to all the deities, and the bhallaveya sruti says that Vishnu is the primary referrent of all the words. The point is that all the gunas that are extolled of various deities in the Vedas are those of Vishnu, and thus He is sarva-shabda-vachya. Thus they show the meaning of Bhagavad-Gita 15.15 "vedaishcha sarvaiH ahaM eva vedyo" (by all the Vedas I am to be known) and Hari-vamsha "vede rAmAyaNe chaiva purANe bhArate tathA | AdAvante cha madhye cha viShNuH sarvatra gIyate".

But what do you have to do with Ramanujacharya or MAdhavacharya?

You do not even accept them fully? So why quote them?

Lord Shiva says in Shiv Gita to Rama - that of all the Vedas, he is to be known.

Since when did you start quoting Rig Veda? Or commenting on Sama Veda?

Prabhupada has restricted you from reading any other literature that does not bear his purport and translation.

You do not find any literature authentic unless Prabhupada translated.

So you are defying your own Parampara Guru by quoting any other literature / scripture that is not SP translated! lol Stick to one standard!

Haribol

 

 

The tenth anuvaka "Stuhi shrutam garta sadam yuvanam mrugannabhima mupahat numugram, mruda jaritre rudra satvano anyante asmanniva pantu senaha": the previous verses (as also subsequent verses) address Rudra, and thus here the speaker asks Rudra to praise one who is "seated in the heart", "terrible like a lion" etc. Then Nrsimha-tapani upanishad clarifies that "ugram" above refers to Lord Nrsimha.

 

 

 

You should be sorry for presenting an incorrect translation by which you will have us believe that Vishnu is created by Soma contradicting quotations you provided from Mahanarayana upanishad, Nrismha tapani and host of other srutis (in addition to contradicting yourself). Shatapata Brahmana and other srutis say that yajna is also referred to as Vishnu, and so the above verse is actually referring to yajna. The Shatpatha Brahmana, Mahopanishad and host of other srutis talk about the birth of Rudra from the antaryami of Brahma i.e. Lord Narayana.

 

 

Then Rg-Veda 7.40.5:

 

"asya devasya mILhuSo vayA viSNoreSasya prabhRthe havirbhiH | vide hi rudro rudriyaM mahitvaM yAsiSTaM vartirashvinAvirAvat"

With offerings I propitiate the branches of this swift-moving God, the bounteous Visnu. Hence Rudra gained his Rudra-strength: O Asvins, ye sought the house that hath celestial viands.

 

makes it clear that Rudra attains his powers from Lord Vishnu.

V shaped Tilak is not the only tilak used by Hindus.

Most Hindus categorized into three basic categories - the Shaivas who wear the auspicious tripunda on their forehead and body with sandal paste or ash, the vaishnavas - who use the V shaped tilak usually made with sandal paste or safron and the Shaktas who also use the red tilka with kumkum, gorochan and ashtgandha..

These tilaks further are worn in different fashions according to sub categories etc. But these are the basic tilak markings. Like most vaishnava tilaks also differ - the gaudiyas, the Ramanandis etc..

Hare Krishna

 

 

Tilaka refers to the markings which Vaisnava devotees apply to their bodies, to remind themselves and others that we are all eternal servants of Lord Krsna. The U-shaped mark represents the heel of Lord Visnu, and the oval part represents the Tulasi leaf. Tilaka is applied to twelve parts of the body, and the twelve names of the Lord are recited with each application. To apply tilaka, start with a little Ganges or Yamuna water (if you don't have any, get some water, and stirring it with your right middle finger, chant:

 

ganga cha yamune chaiva

godavari saravati

narmade sindho kaveri

jale 'smin sannidhim kuru

 

"O Ganges, O Yamuna, O Godavari, O Saravati, O Narmada, O Sindhu, O Kaveri, please become present in this water."

Put the water in your left hand, and rub the hard tilak into the water, creating a wet paste out of the clay. Begin by putting your ring finger of the right hand into the clay, and starting between the eyebrows, bring the finger straight up to the hairline, making two straight lines. It should look like a long, narrow U-shape. Then use some more tilak to make the Tulasi leaf on your nose, it should extend about 3/4 of the way down your nose. As you apply the tilak to your body, chant the following mantras:

 

forehead-om keshavaya namaha

belly-om narayanaya namaha

chest-om madhavaya namaha

neck-om govindaya namaha

right belly-om vishnave namaha

right arm-om madhusudhanaya namaha

right shoulder-om trivikramaya namaha

left belly-om vamanaya namaha

left arm om-shridharaya namaha

left shoulder-om hrishikeshaya namaha

upperback-om padmanabhaya namaha

lower back-om damodaraya namaha

 

Take the remaining tilak, and wipe it on the back of the head, in the area of the sikha, and chant om vasudevaya namaha.

 

Lord Shiva says to Parvati that in the middle of the tilak marking there is a space, and in that space reside Lakshmi and Narayana. Therefore the body that is decorated with tilaka should be considered a temple of Lord Vishnu.

Also a person at the devotee's face who is putting tilak will resemble and remain the Lord Krishna who is supreme persoanality of Godhead.and atleast that time he gets a chance to remain Lord Krishna even though he's involved in his daily activities.Without tilak a material body is said to be deadbody which is been said by Srila Prabhupad.

 

Hare Krishna

Well said guest!!

There are no demi-gods in hinduism...all gods are one...they are the many aspects of the supreme godhead ... whom you call krishna or narayana....god is one...for the creation he divided himself into various aspects. Shakti or power in other words is the goddess...is the very power of god. dont make futile arguments saying...worship of demigods is wrong etc...in hinduism there are only various aspects of god...he is know to various people by various names period.

 

there is no wrong way or right way. do what makes u feel close to the divine

Dear devotee,

Each time a question is address that is not answerable, you get offended and resort to escape tactics as - "blasphemy", "Vaishnava Aparadha" etc..

Sampradaism is good since it conveys a certain line philosophy completely through a disciplic succession, but then you have to rise above it to remove the barriers that sampradayas keep you from accepting or recognizing any other schools of thoughts. This is a main reason of inter-sampradayik quarrels that creat nothing but a breeding ground for "aparadhas" / offenses to and for all.

Again, it is good to glorify your Guru, sampradaya, but when you get too fanatic about it, you may start putting down others. In order to be more defensive about your own line of philosophy you may end up becoming more and more offensive to others.

Now answers and comments to your message:

What I mean by stories is that most of this is about telling and listening to stories and reading out books that are followed fanatically. Stories in line with your thought are hailed with much fanfare, but the ones that are not, are put down, ignored.

Progress in yoga is based on practical 'anubhuti'. And if you haven't got any results from your sadhna, then you can't preach, at least in verious forms of yoga / tantra and other Vedic sadhnas because your knowledge is incomplete. Did Arjuna read and translate a lot of books or did book distribution? umm.. I believe the Vedic sadhnas in those days were different from now. And if we don't follow Vedic ways of Sadhnas, then how Vedic are we... is the question. One may read, but unless he gets an experience and anubhuti from his practice, the progress is not fully ripe. Simply being emotional is not enough to progress spiritually. Too much emotions can lead to heart attacks and kidney failures. I can be all emotional and jump out the window, but Hari is not going to appear before me.

If you are to be considered a successful businessman, the sign is your business should run well and reap benefits, goodwill and expand. But if I simply read ten volumes of books on macro economics and business and claim that I know all about business and am indeed a successful businessman, then that is not a very valid statement. What do you think?

If you really surrender yourself to your Guru (as you've stated), then this is very commendable. Everything starts with the SadGuru (if he really is one), as he is the representative of the Lord. You haven't seen the Lord, but have seen the Guru.

As far as the Bona-Fide disciplic succession is concerned, then I appreciate the Gaudiya lineage. But when you say Lord Krishna-Lord Chaitanya etc. and say that it is an unbroken line - Brahma-Madhava-Chaitanya Sampradaya, then it raises eyebrows! You mentioned Krishna- then Chaitanya. Officially it comes from Brahma!! Is this lineage unbroken? Hardly. It is broken from Madhavacharya. If Madhavacharya is considered the Senior Guru in the succession, senior than Sri Chaitanya, but the Gaudiyas do not agree with Madhava's philosophy at many points and do not accept it, then the lineage IS broken! The lineage is essentially 500 years old Chaitanya Gaudiya Sampradaya. This philosophy is further altered and modified, even more after Jiva Goswami...

During this course several of the origianl Vedic sadhnas philosophies are altered too.

And new scriptures written or purported to match the new way of thinking. It is further divided into different smaller sects and maths who base themselves on the same philosophy, but many political and policy differences. The movement goes down are Chaitanya, but again gain momentum with efforts of BhaktiVinod Thakur a former deputy megistrate with the then British Government. Bhakti Siddhanta Saraswati's disciples further establish their own maths and are still divided on various issues within themselves. As far as I know, Iskcon does not warmly interacts with the Gaudiyas either. And within Iskcon, there are much differences with using Hindu catch words to attract Hindu population funds in countries. There are people for and against this in Iskcon.

So the disciplic succession you are talking about is there, but original philosophies are altered and adulterated.

On example from the Bhagwatam: Sorry I can't remember that exact place I read this, but your scholars can recognize this. The Lord says that he does not appear to the bhakta in the mode of sheer emotions, not in the state of sleep, being awake, half sleep, unconscious etc.. That he is revealed only in the state of a deep trance. This is clearly stated in the Bhagwatam and I read the Prabhupada translated version. BUT, then I further read his purport which sums up that it is vital to eat Prasadam offered to God and chant and sing and this is it!

Now we know that the trance talked about originally is the state of Nirvikalpa Samadhi! ... no comments.

Most of the commentaries do not match however, original Vedic ways of 'sadhnas' and philosophy. But it is in line with bhakti tradition.

Finally, not to go into intricate details of where things go different, I will say that simple hearted earnest bhakti is fair. BUT this does not give you an authority to put everyone else down.

You talk about Yog (Yoga). This means union. Union of the self with Super consciousness. You cannot know Superconsciousness merely by playing bells and symbals and shouting out loud, but there is a chance to know the self. Unless you know one of the two, where is the possibility of Yoga?

It is a very high and not easy process. But Sri Chaitanya gave a simple process of chanting the Hare Krishna (Krsna) Mantra for people who are not capable of undergoing Vedic way of sadhnas that are much higher in order. This is the same Chaitanya (born Visvambhar Mishra) who was initiated into Gopal Mantra by advait Guru and later initiated into sanyas by another advaita Guru.

This simple process of singing dancing and chanting brings devotional joy, love and compassion.

There are no other moods that it is supposed to bring.

And these moods are reflected towards the Lord Hari as well as other devotees AND non-devotees. Remember most devotees preaching and reading out to others that the Lord is in the heart of every living being and a devotee sees them alike! But when it comes down to fighting, defending "my sampradaya, my Guru, my organization etc" this mood is lost! Completely. We start resorting to "Blasphemy" etc words. We need extreme words to pin down our so called 'oponent' who is no longer another jiva created and sustained by Shri Hari and we get down to offending the Lord who also resides in his heart!

A former friend (JMD) of mine who is a direct American disciple of Srila Prabhupada started putting me down saying "Hindu-Shmindu hodge podge" I tried to explain him, but useless. He knew i worship Lord Shiva!! And he was childish enough to say that Lord Shiva is "NOT GOD" and this is "nonsense" and that if I did not accept everything that comes from Iskcon and Prabhupada only and bow down to all devotees, then I will be blasphemied and get very bad reaction etc.

I do not accept this kind of radical behavior and extremism! This sounds no better than a muslim "Fatwa" blasphemi !

And yes you are right, Shiva (or Hari) can really be understood by his own mercy only! And the mercy of Shri Guru! I indeed pray to the Lord of all Lords to give me such mercy. And wish he does the same for you, if you are earnest.

Om Namah Shivaya!!

What do you mean by stories??? are you referring to Bhagwans pastimes or lila as some fairytales???? Then I would regard that as a Blasphemy.

 

Yes I may sound childish in comparison to your Greatness in knowladge of the diffrerent Vedas. So I will not argue with Such GREAT PERSONS as yourselves who are very knowladgable in the different Vedas but to say that with my limited intelligence I surrender my self to the GURU who comes in the Bonafide Displic succession with direct link to the supreme Lord Hari, Lord Krsna, Lord Chaitanya.

 

 

That guru who belongs to the Gaudiya Linage. That Guru who undertook so much hardship in his old age experiancing 2 heart attacks, one who and came to America with almost nothing but on the strength of his Gurudev's orders and total faith in Lord Krsna to teach the world about the glories of Mahaprabhu and Lord Krsna. To me his words weigh a great deal more than any dry "intelligent" phlosophical speculations.

 

As I have said before Yes I may have limited intelligence compared to you, so let me not waste it in trying to argue with such Knowladgable persons as yourselves and I will follow the knowladge that The Dear Most Servant of Lord Krsna has given me.

 

So all I can say is Yes Very Good Worship Lord Shiva that he may give you even more intelligence to understand Him even better.

 

Jay Shri Krsna

 

All Glories to the Vaishnav servants of the servants of the Lord

 

JAy Sirla Prabhupada

Umm...

Govindam Adim Purusham..

But Shiva is the Adi Deva! And the Maha Deva!

If Brahma says that to Hari he also prays to Shiva as the top most deity in the universe to be worshipped. Why don't you quote that too? Brahma worshipped Shiva too! Quote that too! Krishna recognizes Shiva as The God to be worshipped and that if one gets the lotus feet of Mahadev, there is nothing that he needs anymore in all the universes.

Besides, why would you recognize Brahma Samhita as authentic if you you don't recognize samhitas like Shiv Samhita for example? Why such partiality?

Why is Prabhupada the dearmost servant of Hari? What happened to other devotees all through the bhakti kaal? What happened to Mira Bai, Goswami Tulsidas, Kabir, Tukaram and teh list of "enlightened saints" goes on..! Let's accept some non-bengalis too! ;-) There have been saints outside bengal too.

darkness and Jyoti means light. And you still have not Given proof of the Authtification of all the verses you have pasted here!!!!

 

Govindam Adhi Purusha tam aham Bhajami!!!!!!

 

From Brham samhita

 

Govinda is the primeval Lord to whom I pray!!!! A Pray by Lord Brahma the first Guru

 

ALL Glories to

 

Sirla Prabhupada (Dear most servant of the servant....of Lord Hari)

 

Hari Bol!!!

Story time over?

Excuse me but "Shiva will not make such an aparadha etc..." seem childish statements! There are no definitions of "aparadha" for the Lord of all the Universes! the Lord who showed all the ten avataras of Vishnu including Krishna avatara and his lila of killing Kamsa in his Universal form to Rama more than a yuga before the appearance of Krishna himself, doesn't need to meditate on an object to achieve something or doesn't need to go by the ten aparadha definitions of Rupa Goswami!!

1. Who decided Lord Shiva's "platform"?? No one I have heard or known of!

2. "If Lord Krishna becomes Lord Shiva's servant" - upto here is correct. But then "it is because he says" is taken from another place to give the mood you want. Why Krishna worshipped Shiva is told by Krishna himself in the Mahabharata - Anushasana Parva!!! That is the correct answer. Krishna serves his servants and devotees at many occassions - Arjuna's case is a major one. Yes here he says that he gets bound by their love. He gets bound by the love of the Gopis as well and of course, of Radha.

But Krishna ellaborately explains why he worshipped Shiva.

And why Krishna became the greatest Shiva Bhakta - the greated Shaiva!!!

Om Namah Shivaya!!

Remember when Indra Devta became puffed up when people of Vraj Dham were worshiping him?

 

The glorification and prays he got was not meant for him But directed to Lord of All Sacrifices Vishnu.

 

He forgot and became puffed up with EGO thinking himself Bhagawan ( Supreme ).

 

So what did Lord Krsna do to teach Him a Lesson? If you don't know read Krsna lila

 

Lord Shiva is not an ordinary personality but He is also not on the supreme platform of Bhagwan but that does not take away any glories of Maha_Dev. He is the Greatest Vaishnava. Har Har MAHA_DEV!!!!!

 

Please correct me if I am wrong but did Lord Shiva not take on the form of BijrangBali (Hanuman) just so that he can get a chance to Serve the Lord in Ram Lila

 

And anyway if Lord Krsna becomes a servant of Lord Shiva it is because as Lord Krsna says he becomes enslaved and bound by their LOVE for Him that he lovingly Serves his servants. Just Look At The Glories of Bhagawan that he becomes a servant of his servants. As in the case of the Pandavas.

 

Lord Shiva is not like Indra that he would cause such Apraadh. That is why Indra is called Devta and Lord Shiva is Maha-Dev. Lord Shiva is One who is constantly meditating on the Lotus Feet of His most Dear LOrd and hates getting disturbed by Cunning fellows Demons looking for Wishes/Boons to be fullfilled Like Ravana. Therefore just to get rid of them he gives in to their demands (Bhole_naath!!) just so that he can go back to meditating on his Most Worshipable Lord.

 

Just Look at Ravana he wanted to enjoy Laxmi without her dear most Lord and he Ravana was a great servant of Mahadev.

Just look at what happened to him.

 

The Glories of Maha-Dev is that he constantly Glorifies and Seeks opportunities to be near his most beloved object of worship.

So we should Glorify Maha-Dev (Har Har Maha_Dev !!!) and learn to be the servants of the servants of Lord Hari the most beloved object of worship and sacrifice.

 

Hare Krsna

 

Jay Nitai Gaura-Hari

 

Jay Sirla Prabhupada (another great servant of the Lord who sits at his masters feet)

Yes this is the Yajur Veda verse.

So right!!!

I used to wonder why they hardly quote the Vedas like Yajur, Sama and Rig?!

And why they had to retranslate most of the scriptures they use!

The answer is clear.

Rudram and RV verses are translated as per your wish and the translations are wrong since the following verses already clarify who is in the Hridaya of all:

 

From Yajur Veda

Namo hridayyaya cha niveshpya ya cha

Salutations to Him who is in hridayyaya and in the grace.

 

Namo vah kirikebhyo devanam hrudayou bhyo

Salutations to you who showers grace and who dwell in the hearts of the Gods.

 

 

 

Rudra is the Hridaya and He resides there like lion.

 

 

 

Sama Veda XIX Soma Pavamana

 

1. Father of holy hymns, Soma flows onward, the father of the earth, father of heaven.Father of Agni, Surya's generator, the father who begat Indra and Vishnu.

Param Atma has no progenitor. I am sorry.

 

 

Sama Veda XI Indra

 

------3. Vishnu in the lofty ruling power, Varuna, Mitra sing thy praise:

In thee the Maruts' company have great delight.

Well your post is blasphemous and Shaiva aparadha!!

Your effort to belittle Lord Shiva is tamasic and aparadha.

I have studied Sanskrit. And the commentaries are different than what the original verse says.

Shiva Mahapurana is not a Tamasic Purana!!!

Lord Shiva is not affected by any sort of gunas!! So how can a Purana praising the glories of Shiva be Tamasic? There is no logic in your talk.

Secondly I've quoted the Mahabharata to which nobody from Iskcon can ever comment. You can bring up other things but can't comment on the original verses that krishna himself say in Mahabharat's anushasana Parva!!

And as far as cooked up puranas are concerned, then the number of scriptures that the Gaudiyas have cooked up and twisted are so many that they are leading the public into believing that it is indeed the Vedic culture.

If this wasn't the case then Prabhupada wouldn't have restricted his symbal bearing flock not to read any other literature except from the one that he wrote commentary on.

There is a lot of duality in your culture. The books you quoted are not commented by Prabhupada. If you go by his rule then you should not even be quoting or reading them in the first place.

Krishna himself and Rama himself accepts Shiva as the object of their worship!! Bhishma Pitamah who was a highly elevated sage and highly respected by Krishna himself says that Madhava has pleased and worshiped Shiva in every incarnation. So if I read what BHishma and Rishi Upmanyu says, and what Prabhupada says then I would certainely be accepting their words over Prabhupada's! Prabhupada is no match for Rishi Upmanyu or Bhishma. If Krishna says that he worshipped Lord Shiva adn accepts him as the highest object of worship, then I have to accept it. Its a different matter what the gaudiyas say and preach. They don't preach the original Vedas. And that's why they had to write so much literature from a their own point of view. I don't feel obliged to accept that over the original Vedic knowledge. Still you can't comment on the Anushasana Parva. You can't comment on Bhishma's words. On shri Krishna's words!!

Om Namah Shivaya.

First of all do you know complete sanskrit ?

If you know complete sanskrit, then read "eshwara samhita" and bhagavath gita.

in eshwara samhitha, you can see Shiva accepting "Narashima deva" as supreme God and praying to God.

Also In "Ramatapani upanishad" you can see Shiva accepting "Lord Rama" as Supreme God and praying to Rama.

In Bhagavath Gita. Lord Krishna tells Arjuna that All Brahma, Shiva, Indra etc.. are part of himself only.

 

So there is no question of telling Krishna/Rama as devotee of Shiva.

 

whereas theres no citation in valmiki ramayana potraying Lord Rama worshipping Shiva. so called rameshwara story is taken from tamasic puranas.

 

All these stories of telling vishnu worshiiping shiva are stories cooked up by Shaivas.

 

Anyway, forget puranas. Come to kali yuga.Take incidents from Alwars life.

In kaliyuga, Thirumalizai Alwar burns Shiva using his yogic power. Later Vishnu Saves Shiva from anger of "Thirumalizai Alwar". Thirumalizai Alwar is a great devotee of Lord Narayana. If you have doubt regarding this, read Alwar puranam.

 

So if a devotee of Vishnu can burn shiva then it clearly establises that all the shaiva stories are imaginary.

 

Jaya Jaya Shankara Hara Hara Shankara

Om Namo Surya Narayanaya

Again, another one sided interpretation.

Here the verse says "serving" not a devotee!

Also, if I get a boon from Lord Shiva and his power does something for me, I can say that I am being served by Shiva? This is how you can see it.

If a swami gets a donation of a thousand dollars from a rich man, then of course it can be indeed said that the rich man served him. But it doesn't make either of the two as bigger or smaller. They can be just different.

Thavasuprabhathamaravindalochane

Bhavathu prasanna mukhachandra mandale

Vidhisankarendra vanithabhirarchithe

Vrishasaila nathadavithe, davanidhe

Thingal oli thiru mugathil,

Pongum arul pozhibavale,

Ingukalai vaniyudan,

Indirani ambigayam,

Mangayargal thozhudu ethum,

Manbudaya thani thalaivee,

Chenkamala vengadathan ,

Thiru thevi ezhundu arulvai.

 

A very good morning to you,

Oh Goddess with lotus like eyes,

Who heralds happiness,

From the full moon face,

Who is served by ,

Brahma, Shiva and Indra,

Who is the storehouse of mercy,

And who is the darling of him ,

Who has the Venkata Mountain.

 

- Taken from "Sri Venkatesha Suprabatham"

 

Jaya Jaya Sankara Hara Hara Sankara

Om Namo surya narayanaya