Posts posted by aditya
and no where in mandukya upanishad is it stated tht it is vishnu tht is parabrahma
and your above story is of what intellectual value. The story is quite childish.
The trinity who are considered to be forms of Nirguna Brahman engage in petty power struggle. The very content is Tamasic in nature. I would not even consider this story.
oh really? since when did iskconites start getting this intelligence to judge whether a story is petty or inttelligent? or maybe u guys dont find such stories intelligent? u might find stories from bhagavatam very intelligent..like brahma testing krishna even thogugh he is a part of brahman coz it attests the supremacy of vishnu..when the same brahma gets bewildered by shive u guys find it "petty"..how about kunti getting pregnant by so many men? throwin away her child which is far worse than abortions which u guys detest? how about applying cowdung on the face? drinking the urine of cows? as validated in bhagavata?how about vishnu having millions of heads and the patience of arjuna for counting them?its very sensible nah? how about krishna crying like a deranged idiot when a fake vasudavas haed was pput in front of him? how about balarama murdering rukmi just becoz he insulted him in a dice game? how about balarama murgering romaharshana jus coz he didnt get up from the arena?u guys are fanatics with a mental imbalance
the same krishna in the same mahabharata quotes the imp of shiva in anushasana parva and even constructs shivasahasranama....and the same vishnu offers his lotus eyes to shiva and gets the name padmaksha......
the first offense to the holy name is to consider anything independent of krishna..the neophytes maynot get this now but grdually they will know tht shiva,devi or brahma are not independent of HIM but manifestations of HIMSELF...KRISHNA is parabrahma but so is shiva n devi
In 'mandukiya Upanishad Lord Vishnu is mentioned as "Parabrahma".
they simply refer to parabrahma...but nowhere is it mentioned tht vishnu is him
i just dont knw how u got this blind faith!!i wish i cud
mat-param, Prabhupada translates it as subordinate to Me.
mat param means superior to me...ne1 knws tht...i dont knw how exactly the word param became subordinate...ne1 with common sense knws param means superior or supreme...it doesnt mean subordinate...check out as to who is the real bogus preacher
ur english translation is farce
i want u to give me the sanskrit verse plus the exact english translation
to suchandra...can u give me a word from the sanskrit verse which means subordinate?????
the exact trnslation is
now i shall explain that which is to be known realizing which the nectar of immortality is attained ,that reality as having me as the supreme beyond effect and designated as brahman the ultimate truth
i wonder where these people get these wierd translations from..i mean where exactly is the word SUBORDINATE given in the text...and yet these people shamelessly yell till the skies tht their translation is AS IT IS!!!
"I shall now explain the knowable, knowing which you will taste the eternal. Brahman, the spirit, beginningless and subordinate to Me, lies beyond the cause and effect of this material world."(Bhagavad Gita 13.3)
i beg ur pardon...verybody who has common sense knws tht this quote was mistranslated by ur benevolent acharya for justifying his philosophy of godism
Lord Shiva is like Krishna's arm,part of Him, always serving Him but never equal to Him. Even Lord Shiva himself was offended when he was addressed as the supreme. All our guru's from the bonafide parampara stress the importance of worshiping with one pointed exclusive devotion, not the "all manifestations are equal" ideas that are suggested here. They are most harmful to obtaining Krishna prema.
looks like this person neither knws the philosophy or is acting like an ignorant fanatic....krishna in gita clearly states tht he is shiva and he is vishnu...this person was behaving as tho krishna personally came to him and explained tht he was the supreme!!! for the kind info of the above person it was krishna who did rigorous penance to shiva and even said" oh lord! even tho ur the giver of salvation i am ashamed to ask u for a materialistic boon" reference anushasana parva mahabharata from which bhagavad gita was taken....in narada pancharatra its stated tht both are equal....plz read the famous story of annamayya of sri sampradaya.....when the person distinguishes b/w shiva and krishna, krishna appears as shiva and enlightens annamayya....in jagannath puri there was a brahmin who used to consider ganesha as the supreme person and then lord jagannath takes the form of ganapati and liberates him....
i wonder when krishna would enlighten such souls who have a measly consept of god...they cannot understand who he actually is!! and then they say it is harmful....
whole thing is pointless..it is not that iskcon went and measured the qualities of the gods...while contemplating on such stupid things they are gettin away from god....surely people are not goin to believe this unless they are fools...i dont think it is written in any scripture about the percentage of qualities....krishna is no doubt the supreme but so is shiva... krishna in the bhagavad gita states that he is supreme but the same krishna in mahabharata anushasana parva constucts the shiva sahastranama which is far superior to vishnu sahasranama..krishna highlights the supremacy of shiva to dharmaraja...even in padmapurana krishna states that the god who is to be worshipped is shiva...similarly shiva states that it is rama who is to be worshipped in the same purana...puranas and vedas are meant to increse the devotion of a particular sect but not to give rise to petty quarrels...newaz if any1 has read the tales of jagannath u will know that god assumes the form which the devotee likes...to a person who thot tht ganesha is the supreme jagannath appeared as ganapati and liberated him.. when ramanujachraya stressed on worshippin the lord according to scriptures n not allow sudras into the temple the lord appeared in his dream and threatened him....people are so ignorant that they are so busy contemplating on stupid things like supremecy of shiva n krishna that their own devotion goes down the drain...if a devotee is pure then he realizes that no god is independent of krishna and that shiva is krishna
shiva is a part of the supreme person and so is krishna.....there shud be no distinction b/w them...one who finds a difference b/w them surely attains hell....this is the verdict of all scriptures...i guess people from iskcon are a bit fanatic and hence they cannot digest the fact from others...i personally like krishna but tht doesnt mean the faith of others is wrong...shiva is devotee of krishna and krishna is a devotee of shiva.....there shud b no diff b/w them
Did Lord Vishnu recommend Goddess worship?
in The Hinduism Forum
Posted · Report reply
Prabhupada quotes from brahma samhita - so there is no speculation involved...
2) Prabhupada is in the bona fide disciplic succession, so there is no doubt that he is an authority...
chayeva - shadow is from the actual Brahma Samhita shloka...
If worshipping the shadow of God is your goal of life, then do so...
But why not worship the source of the shadow?
Does it not make logical sense?
no it doesnt really...coz the stupid statement tht u quoted is from brahma samhita no doubt....but did u ever use ur head and pondered as to wat exactly is brahma samhita?which u guys r so pompously quoting to every tom dick n harry? jus bcoz u guys r advertising it doesnt mean it is bonafide...brahma samhita is neither from any vedic scripture nor a purana or upanisha..it is a paltry article taken by chaitanya mahaprabhu in some adi keshava temple in south india...and sir! every temple has some quoting or the other..if u go to tamilnadu u wud find millions of temples each with their own intepretations of their deities..ud see vishnu worshipping parvati doin tapasya and so on...so do u regard them as bonafide too? just becoz other shaivaites or impersonalists dont have enough funding and brainwashing capacities like u pple doesnt mean brahma samhita is authentic? and now u mite even say tht chaitanya charitamrita is a"scripture"....no doubt about tht? but letme tell u smthin...brahmastuti a hymn to the goddess by brahma is more bonafide as it is written by vyasadava and not derived from some temple....ok?and ur prabhupad quotes so many things to suit his own agendas....tht doesnt mean he is bonafide...and regarding the parampara system......ramanujacharya was a big fool like u and ur prabhupada and went to puri and halted the entry of commoners into the temple and even he like a bigotted idiot said"i come from a parampara and things shud be done in my own way"...as a consequence to that the supreme lord appeared in his dream as jagannatha and warned him with dire consequences and asked him to leave puri asap... u guys have a dearth of common sense and ur fanatics......ur like frogs in a well..u cannot think of nethin beyond urstories fecund with nonsense.. and dont ever dare to call urself as the only bonafide cult..there are many cults in chennai and tirupati who preach far more better philosophy about krishna than u pple..just tht u guys are ignorant about it...coz ur brainwashed... lord krishna is the most merciful god and he is not limited to a particular form unlike how fools think...HE is everything and everthing is HIM...he is vishnu,shiva,devi and ganesha....u pple have money so u go and broadcast shit about hinduism but tht doesnt mean ur correct/...thts y the success in the foreign countries..where drug addicts n maniacs n hippies n depressed morons are hell bent to join ur cult