BinduMadhav

Atanu wrote: -------------------- Who needs to convince BINDU et al? -------------------- Atanu Bhaiyya, I have always been convinced. After reading all your and Srinivasan's posts, I am more than fully convinced and I have composed a little piece here. NArAyanAt Paramam Gatim NAsti. NArAyan VAsudEva tvam hi Parama Brahmo Asi. VAsudEvasya PUjAm KarishyE, Na Rudrasya. RudradEvo VAsudEvasya Parama Bhaktah iti Vedah. Iti BinduMAdhavopanishad Om ShAntih ShAntih ShAntih Harih Om! Translation: There is no Higher Goal than Sriman NArAyana Oh NArAyana VAsudEva, You alone are Supreme Brahman I shall do VAsudEva's PUja, not Rudra's Vedas declare: "Rudra is NArAyana's Greatest Devotee" So says BinduMAdhavopanishad Om ShAntih ShAnti ShAntih Hari Om! Bhaiyya - Please do not take this personally. ------------------- So, Soma (Sa-Uma) is the highest Brahman where speech abides. And beyond Soma? Rudra alone. Since, Rudra uses Soma as socket of his bow. ------------------- Uh Oh! Now you are differentiating between Rudra and Sa-UmA (Shiva). Not only that, you are placing Shiva at a lower level than Rudra. Does not ShankarAcharya think (ShivAnanda Lahari) that Shiva appoints individual souls to the place of Brahmatva, Vishnutva or Rudratva? Big heirarchical issue here. We need to resolve this first! ------------- SHIVA IS THE ROOT, GAURI THE POWER, VISHNU THE GATIM. ------------- So Vishnu is the Supreme Goal, right? Obviously, The Supreme One's abode is the Supreme Goal. So thank you for acknowledging that Vishnu is the Supreme Lord.

Atanu Bhaiyya, I know you have Siva fixed in your heart. Which is great, since Siva is one step towards Sriman Narayana Vasudeva. But all the quotes you are providing are not adequate. How about Devi Sukta in which Lakshmi Devi says: "I make whosoever I like Ugra (or Rudra or Siva), BrahmA, a Rishi or a wise man; I bend the bow of Rudra to slay the enemies of Lord (Narayana)"? Here it states clearly that Rudra gets his power from Devi. Does the list have Vishnu? Nah! Bhaiyya, you can not alter the Shruti, which is the truth. Truth is Truth; it is immutable.

----- Ancient greeks and romans knew the earth was a sphere. It's well documented that at least as early as the sixth century BC it was known and accepted by Aristotle, Pythagoras, Euclid, and Aristarchus, among many others that they have observed ( NOT just believed ) that the earth was a sphere. ------ Shathapatha Brahmana clearly states that the earth is a sphere. It was written around 3000 BC or earlier. I will constrain myself and not mention a few more startlingly brilliant observations in that great work.

---------- Didn't he predict that the world would end in the year 2000, and people were scared or something, well it didn't, and people are still believing ---------- Very good point, Govindramji. If I may add to your comments, the writings of Nostradamus are so cleverly written that one can deduce practically anything from them. One can deduce that the world would end in the year 2000, and then one can, by looking at his writing, deduce that the first deduction was wrongly deduced. That is the only cleverness Nostradamus can be proud of. I would not believe anything that he has written.

--------- ***** After you stop laughing (grin), ********* Sound of gritting teeth, I hear. There is grin? --------- If you were BinduMadhav, you would have a totally different attitude in life. This (or other similar) situations are amusing to me. If this situation were to cause me to grit my teeth, I would not be the true follower of Siva or the true Bhakta of Lord Hari.

-------- No one here gets upset At lord Hari being supreme, any Hindu would or should get upset if Lord hara is depicted as lusty or being killed off. I am sorry to state that most of your posts came across condescending on others although you have mellowed a bit lately, just my observation. -------- Where did I say that Siva is killed off? Someone else (was it Shyam) narrated a Puranic episode of Lord Vishnu's Chakra cutting off Rudra's head, but it was not me. As far as Siva being lusty, I am not saying it, our scriptures say that. You one of them Saivites too (wide grin)?

My dear Thiruvengadam, After you stop laughing (grin), read the following carefully, if necessary a couple of times. {i thought i would never talk to u but seing u in such a situation made me soft....} I think it is my turn to grin widely, my dear Thiruvengadam with the lovely name. What situation? I don't find this or any other situation particularly distressing. -------------- i do agree that saranathan, ravilochanam, shyam guest, srinivasa guest are u but i do have to point out that all their way of projecting their view point was very similar to that of urs....though their language style was different.... --------------- What? You agree that Saranathan, Ravilochanan, etc are all ME? This is pure arrogance. What leads you to this conclusion, my good friend? Have you any proof? If you don't have any proof, I suggest that you keep such an opinion about my person to yourself. ---------- Bindu i want u to understand a great secret....that is...in winning an argument u actually loose the other person....now tell me what is more important to a hindu? winning an argument or winning a soul? ---------- Wow! I did not know that you, of all persons, is into harvesting the souls. I thought you were a Hindu. But you sound like a Christian. Winning a soul? To who? To Lord Vaishnav Siva or to Lord Jesus Christ? -------------- ... u have all the rights to present ur view points but u have no rights to say that others are wrong ... -------------- If two persons express differing opinions about a subject, either one of them is wrong or both of them must be wrong. Do you understand why I am saying that others (who express their opinion that Siva is supreme) is wrong? If you and other Saivites do not accept the authority of Srimad Bhagavatham, Srimad Bhagavad-Gita or the Vedas, which clearly indicate that Rudra is born of BrahmA's forehead, just tell me so. I will understand how much of a Hindu you are. All I see is evasion of the truth. You Saivites cannot truly face the truth. The scriptures clearly state that Sriman Narayana, the Shankha-Chakra-GadA-dhaari is the Supreme Lord, Parama Purusha or Sarvottama. Go back and read the commentaries of Srinivasan, Ravilochanan, Shyam, Saranathan and others, who, by the way, is not me. ----------- Bindhu, 'a good had and yet unknown is a good not had'-John Milton fron 'The lost Paradise (On his blindness)' ----------- I truly suggest that you read Milton's "Paradise Lost". Your quote is either full of typos or you are not quoting it right. ------------ as a hindu u should have learned how to love differences and accept completely different view points and yet stick on to urs..... ------------ I love the differences. In fact, I respect them. Unlike the Saivites, who drive the good Vaishnavs out of their state to a more tolerant state like Karnataka. I understand that the position of the Saivites is wrong, but they get my tolerance. Can you, as a Saivite, say that you or your ancestors have, are or will do the same for Sri Vaishnavs? Son, I have to acknowledge that you have a lovely name, which reminds me of sweet Lord Venkateshvara. But I don't see any sweetness in your writing here. Nor do I see logic in them. Like I have said, Thiruvengadam, I feel sorry for you.

Guest wrote: ------------------- Bindu, saranathan, ravilochanam, shyam guest, srinivasa guest and some more guests are all same. He is keeping a sporty veneer. That is all. He has poison inside him. -------------------- I am BinduMadhav. I am not Saranathan, nor am i Ravilochanan, nor Shyam, nor Srinivasa. If you read the posts carefully, you will notice distinction in writing styles. I don't have poison inside me and others have no poison in them either. Scholarly arguments for one side of the debate does not mean that the person has evil intent. Take it a little easy, son. Just remember that we did not write the scriptures. Unless, of course, you are such a staunch Advaitin that you don't differentiate between us and the seers; in which case, that bitterness does not belong in you at all.

Some 'Guest' wrote: ------------------- The reason you get bored even after seeing a wealth of quotes from the literature about the greatness of Shiva is because, you are adamant. If at all you read vedas being neutral you will very easily find out who is great. ------------------- I am adamant and I admit it. That is because I have been taught by my Acharya what is the truth and what is not. He has commanded me to speak the truth quietly but firmly. Lord Krishna/Hari/Vishnu IS the Supreme Lord of the visible and invisible, transcendant and immanent, Para and Apara. All other deities are created by Him, are not Jivanmuktas, and they worship him. But am I dogmatic about my views? Not necessarily. If you think I am dogmatic, then perhaps the Guru-Shishya relationship should be shot down, because it will not work any more. Does not Hinduism command us to find a Guru for our spiritual guidance? ------------ And one more point is, first you have been calling everybody else fools and idiots and were displaying tremendous ego. Now that you have been tamed, its time for you to approach the literature with a fresh perspective and find out that, afterall, advaitic stage is the ultimate stage, and devotion, knowledge, action etc are only paths to that stage. ----------- You are absolutely wrong in stating that I have been calling everyone fools. Read all my posts carefully and you will find out that I have always been very considerate of others' feelings. The only time I called someone a fool was when I commented on Rajasekhar's opinion that Bhakti is not a path. I realized my mistake and I immediately apologized (although I have never heard from him). He probably does not even care; but apparently, all the rest of the Saivites on this group have decided to keep reminding me that I am an egotistical person. One mistake and one is never forgiven (grin). How about Atanubhai, who has called me names multiple number of times? But I am wasting my breath here. Allow me to point out to you that all our scriptures are open to interpretation. They are not, obviously, set in stone and clarity. So if I interpret Lord Hari as the Supreme, why are you so upset? Until I joined this group, I did not know that Hindus get upset by others' opinions.

My dear guest, You wrote: ----------------------------- Bindu you are old news to this forum, you have become bored. Maybe you should visit Christian, Muslim forums and spark your arguments with them. Maybe you will be doing a favour to the Hindu community. ---------------------------- You are perhaps right. I am bored that I am listening to the same old arguments about the greatness of Siva. There is nothing new in Atanubhai's arguments. All the same, I am very grateful (almost gleeful) that such passionate arguments are put forth by both my fellow Vaishnavites and my enemy (grin), i.e., my buddies in the Saivite community. Such debates lead to more understanding by all the parties. The only thing is someone has to summarize the entire thread. If no one else will do it, I will do it myself in the next few weeks. But go to a Christian or Muslim forum? Thanks, no. I may have my differences with my Hindu friends, but I love them and I would rather listen to them talk about Siva than any Christian talk about Jesus Christ or Muslims about Allah or Prophet Mohammed. And I know what their reactions will be if I talk about Lord Krishna to them.

Dear Atanu Bhaiyya, You wrote: ------------ Can one ever match such shameful insult to sacred literature? And most readers are silent. They talk of matching the onslaught of Christians and Moslems. ------------- Atanu, my dear friend, please don't be so angry. You know in the depth of your heart (where you claim Siva resides) that Ravilochanan, Srinivasan and other great scholars are putting forth arguments in favor of Lord Vishnu, not to put down Rudra deva, who deserves venerance, but purely to highlight the greatness of the Supreme Lord. No one is distorting the Vedic literature. If you believe Siva to be the Supreme Lord, I will respect your beliefs. It is just that I am convinced that our literature portrays him as such, after reading your posts. That is all.

Atanu Bhaiyya, You wrote: ------------------- Yajur Veda i. 8. 6. d Rudra alone yieldeth to no second. ------------------- Bhaiyya, I agree that Rudra yields to no second, but only among the gods. But there is no comparison between Lord Krishna Vasudeva and Siva. Lord Krishna easily defeated Siva and it was only Siva's prayers that protected his protege (Banasura). What sayest thou, Bhaiyya?

Deewani wrote: ------- Before I commence on my understanding, please forgive me if I have erred. I hope you are able to enlighten us further. Pritha - Daughter of Surasen. Pritha was raised by Surasen's brother Kuntibhoj, and hence Pritha became known as Kunti. Vasudev - Son of Surasen Arjun - Son of Kunti Subhadra - Daughter of Vasudev My sources are the Mahabharat by BR Chopra, texts and also the following website has a link on the family tree: Family tree for Kaurav, Pandav & Krishna Please clarify the relationships if I have been misled. -- Thank you, dear Deewaniji. I re-learnt something that I had long ago forgotten. Appreciate your help. But just one comment. This means that Arjuna married his mom's brother's daughter. Even now, this is acceptable in certain parts of South India (marrying Maama's daughter, Maama being one's mom's brother). In such a case, the bride and the groom will not belong to the same Gotra. But yes, they are cousins.

Atanu Bhaiyya, {RIG VEDA 10.191.3: SA VISHNU SA SHIVA SA RUDRA SO'KSHARA SAH} This obviously refers to Sriman Narayana. He is Vishnu, So is He Rudra, He is Akshara, etc. NarayanasUkta in MahAnArAyanOpanishad supports it: "Sa Brahmah Sa Shivah Sa Harih SEndrah SOksharah ParamasvarAt". This means that Rudra is not Narayana. Narayana, really comes in the form of Rudra. So Rudra is a form of Narayana. This means that Rudra is not the Supreme, he is just one of them gods. So, in this instance, I respectfully submit that you are wrong.

Deewani wrote: {But did not Arjuna marry Subhadra, who was his cousin? Arjun's mother and Subhadra's father were brother and sister.} Dear Deewani, Can you elaborate on this a little? Who exactly were Kunti's parents and who exactly were Subhadra's parents? Of course, we all know that Subhadra was Krishna's sister and Kunti was a princess that married Pandu. Also, can you cite references? Thanks.

Atanu Bhaiyya, -------------------------------- ****** Atanu cannot understand unless it is spoon feeded to him.********* It should be spoon fed. There is no feeded. - Obviously you are angry that your arguments are all defeated, right? Please don't be. It is not anyone's fault if Lord Krishna ParamAtma is the Supreme Lord and Siva is His worshipper. And don't take a simple typo by our friend (feeded instead of feed) and take it out on him. There is much truth in what he says. And as I have said before, I and many other Vaishnavs acknowledge you as a well read scholar. Shivam BabhUva Te Krodhah!

My dear Thiruvengadam, I know I make you laugh and hopefully you will be immensely amused by reading the following. As I have quoted earlier to you, the word 'Shiva' means one who is auspicious. Shivam, Bhadram, KalyAnam, Mangalam and Shubham are all similar words, according to our Thesaurus, NAmalingAnushAsanam. The name Siva is not attributed to Rudra until Yajurveda, although the word Shivam is used to indicate auspiciusness in Rig Veda. The name was applied to Rudra in Rudram to basically appease him. Shiva is the Aghora Roopa of Siva and, of course, the Ghora Roopa of Siva is Rudra. On the other hand, Vishnu means one who is all pervading. It is not the Lord's duty; it is His nature or an attribute. It is not His duty to be an Achyuta (One who is never defeated) and it is not His duty to be Krishna (dark skinned One) or VAmana (Handsome youth) or Sridhara (Lord of Shrih or Goddess Lakshmi). They are all His attributes. Just out of curiosity, why the sudden interest in the meanings of the Lord's names (or attributes)? I love you, my good young friend. Keep up your good humor! May Lord Krishna bless you!

My dear Guest, These articles you have written are simply superb. Please keep writing them. They are like nectar to a Dasa of Sri Krishna Paramatma. Thank you very much and may Lord Krishna bless you!

------------ But I read somewhere that chanting the Holy Name for some material sake is offence toward the Name. Please comment.. (However internally I am agree to stay 100% with Sri Krsna, the problem is that during last 5-6 years I have asked Him several times to help me, and still have no result...) ------------ Saivites and some Vaishnavites recite Chamaka, which is basically a list of requests to God. Generally this is done after reciting Rudram by Saivites and Purushasukta by Vaishnavites. I don't think this is an Aparadha. Lord Krishna is there to grant us what we need in this life. Lord Sri Krishna Paramatma works in imperceptible ways. Even if you think you have no results, you should continue to chant His holy Names. Personally I prefer Vishnu Sahasranama, since it is so beautiful, meaningful and satisfying.

{Oh yes. All gunas exist in the seer alone. The world is as you are.} That is a very profound statement. I am impressed! Tell me, Atanuji, do you agree with Shankar that horrible creatures like BinduMadhav will go to eternal hell or eternal darkness? Of course, he might have learnt of darkness (AndhakAra) from Ishavasyopanishad. But I am curious to see if you agree with his interpretation. You seem to be a good staunch Saivite and if you agree with Shankar's interpretation, I will know the general opinion of Saivites. Thanks in advance, my good friend.

Dear Thiruvengadam, {the whole concept of Ganesh story to show that women has a word over her man....and that a child born should get the blessings and acknowledgement of all its relatives...if not for the beheading act Ganesh wound'nt have been the Ganesh He is now..} That is a totally new interpretation for an old story from our sacred literature. But why did Siva have to go through all that just to bless the child? My good friend, this interpretation is so weak that I cannot help but smile. I understand that you love Siva, but you don't 'defend' Siva by offering such explanations. {and who is that gentle man who calls Shiv as a pervert (one who can't control his sexual urge)?} Tut tut. I will never call Siva a pervert. But the story, my friend, is right there in Srimad Bhagavatham. I did not write the story. I did not even exaggerate or distort it. {all the plays of Lord Shiva are called as Thiruvilayadal in tamil} Now you are talking. Beautiful movie with that name with Balamurali Krishna's 'OrunAl Poduma?' in Ragamalika. Have you seen it?

Dear Guest, You have raised very good points here. {Muktito Upanishad is not a pramana Upanishad and no prominent Acharya of ancient periods have referred to it. also there is an Upanishad called Allahpanishad which praises Allah. It was written by some hypocrite.} I would not be surprised if there is a Kristopanishad too. Muktitopanishad? I never heard of it from my Acharya. You are right about this and all other points. The Advaitins want to stick to their guns because Vishnu-maya has affected their reasoning. They should chant Sri Krishna Paramatma's name constantly to get out of this dilemma.

{I picked up nothing. So cannot drop anything.} That is truly interesting. So hypocrisy is ingrained in you, eh? One of your birth characteristics? I would never have believed that Saivites were such interesting people. Thanks for the insight, Atanu.

Great scholar named Shankar wrote: {Bindu, do not take this for mistake! But what did Aswathama get as punishment from Sri Krishna ? You said "Even if I am wrong, according to Hindu scriptures and philosophy, I will get another chance. No one will spend eternity in hell or darkness just because that person might make some mistakes, knowingly or unknowingly." - Thats not the case for Aswathama, and for you to write about Parameshwara as a soap opera way is worse than what Aswathma did. There is so much behind each event of Lord Shivas act which you described earlier. Vishnu interevienes in almost all the stories since its Lord Vishnus role to do that, Parameshwara knows whats going to happen, he doesnt need to interviene.} My dear Shankar, You still don't get it, do you? Again, you don't surprise me. Since you are so far behind, I will explain again. Ashvattama got what he got from Sri Krishna Bhagavan because of his own volition, he killed many people including children, while they were asleep. Secondly, the so called 'eternity' will end for Ashvattama when the Kaliyug will end. You see, God, unlike what some Christians and Muslims believe, does not believe in eternal punishment. No one deserves eternal punishment for a crime committed for a finite period of time. But then, I am learning new things from a Saivite. You guys specialize in striking people's hearts with terror, are you not? Like your god Rudra Deva. 'Believe Parameshvara Siva as the Supreme God or else'!!! Or else what? I will spend eternity going through punishment at Siva's hands? And for believing what my culture has taught me? Apparently you are trained well by the Christian missionaries. I have never called anyone a fool so I will stop here.

My dear Shankar, I am not disappointed. I expected a reply very similar to what you have written. {Can you provide any reference to the story as actually summarized by you ?} Sure. Go to IndiaDivine website and read the story of Tirupati's Lord Venkateshvara. {Why did Shiva come and tell you that he makes people cry while dying ? } I did not say Siva came to tell me that. The definition of Rudra is that. There are other definitions. As a worshipper of Siva, you should know all that. But it is becoming increasingly apparent to me that you don't know much about Siva himself. Yes, as a devotee of Siva, go ahead and spend your time in Kailas. If you live in Kailas and I in Vaikunta, at least you and I don't have to meet and I having fun at your expense, thus infuriating you. But then, you don't sound like an Advaitin. Go live in Kailas with Siva? Don't you mean 'Merge' with Siva? So Siva's worshippers love Vishnu too, eh? Vaishnavs love Siva too, as Siva is a model for us. Siva is the greatest and best Vaishnav there is. Saint Purandara Dasa sings: "Oh Rudra, give me devotion to Purandara Vittala". This is typical of Vaishnavs. We don't beg for any material things, we beg for more devotion to Lord Krishna. And the Saivites? They have a long list in Chamaka. {Bindu this why i stated that your guru has to be also an ignorant and dumbfounded being like you.} Be careful here. I have warned Atanu before and hopefully he learnt his lesson. You know nothing about my Acharya and without knowing anything about him, don't drag him into the conversations. Let us talk about you and me (or, if you are a little more mature, your opinions versus mine). {you also referenced Vishnu as a mere human being here "Mohini somehow slipped from Siva's clutches and ran away". Does this line shows any signs you have respect for Vishnu or either Shiva ?} My god man, you have not read Srimad Bhagavatha Mahapuranam, have you? Please read it well and increase your knowledge and then we can probably have a good scholarly discussion. {Again you narrate this story as this happened in a rural village in Khandahar. What is this Bindu, Shiva, Parvati, Ganesh are again some human beings living in Khandahar, Afganistan.} So are you saying that you don't believe any of the Puranic stories? If so, so state. {I guess you will get the point now, if you dont then there is no cure for you.} No, my dear Shankar, there is no cure for YOU. Because, although I pointed out what Hindu scriptures say, you keep saying "Why you deserve to dwell in darkness". At least you dropped the 'eternity' part of it, for which you deserve much credit.