My questions on Hinduism

[Guruvani 0]

 

Absolutely. Geeta has a whole chapter on Karma. "Nahi kashchid kshanamapi....". indicates there can't be any akarma.

 

All karmas except that done for yagna bind the karmee. Yagna in the context means nature's cycle.

 

An aethist engaged in deeds without any desire for fruits of action is destined for deliverance or liberation, for, in absence of cause, there can't be any effect. A bhaki margi is advised to offer the fruits of action to the Supreme, else, it'd accumulate in the form of desires. Bhakti marg requires one to maintain his identity separate from the Supreme, since without such separateness there can't be any devotion. Jnana marg and Karma marg are different and the same methods don't hold good there.

 

--

 

Here are some references to AKARMA in Sri Gita and Bhagavat Purana:

 

 

akarma-kṛt — without doing something; BG 3.5

akarma — inaction; BG 4.16

akarma — inaction; BG 4.18

akarma-hetum — the cause of the end of fruitive activities; SB 5.6.14

akarma-kṛt — without performing action; SB 6.1.44

akarma-kṛt — without doing anything; SB 6.1.53

akarma — freedom from fruitive results; SB 8.1.14

akarma — failure to perform such duties; SB 11.3.43

akarma — nonperformance of prescribed duties; SB 11.7.8

[Guest guest]

 

Here are some references to AKARMA in Sri Gita and Bhagavat Purana:

Just Gudiya interpretations. Nothing significant!

Even though a karm is done for spiritual cause, it neverthless is karma and you are bound to reap a reaction and effect from it!!

[Guest guest]

 

In terms of Puranic dharma shastras, karma is the law of cause and effect.

so, karma, according to the Vedic definition, refers to the laws of "material" nature and how actions always result in reactions.

 

I haven't met anyone in my life who is not doing this "material" karma though talking about spiritual heavens!!! We are living in a material universe and are bound by its laws. And everyone is a karmi!! Its just a way of interpreting things! It can be specidied that if you are praying to God, you are not karmi! But that is also a karma!

 

 

Spiritual activity on behalf of the Supreme Absolute is not considered as karma but as "akarma" or not involving the actions and reactions of material nature.

 

According to your definition, all Vedic people were akarmis and were doing nothing with their lives!! hmm.... pretty screwed!

 

 

Karma-yoga is the system of performing fruitive activity and then offering the fruits of that activity unto the service of the Absolute Integer - the Supreme Spirit.(Krishna)

Activity in service, obediance and harmony with the Absolute Good is known as bhakti, not karma.

Yes and there is nothing wrong in performing activity in anticipation for fruits. But to understand that finally the ultimate enjoyer of fruits is Narayana or Shiva is enlightening. But this doesn't really come by cramming! This is my view. And this is the yogic Vedic and Puranic view as well.

[Guest guest]

 

Here are some references to AKARMA in Sri Gita and Bhagavat Purana:

These quotes are ok. Just like a lot of other things in Bhagwad Gita that we either haven't understood in the right sense or misinterpreted.

[Guruvani 0]

 

Just Gudiya interpretations. Nothing significant!

Even though a karm is done for spiritual cause, it neverthless is karma and you are bound to reap a reaction and effect from it!!

 

You said there is no such thing a akarma.

I showed references in Sri Gita and Bhagavat to show you are wrong.

You come back with arrogant condescending accusations that it is Gaudiya interpretation when Sri Gita and Bhagavat both existed long before ever there was any Gaudiya sect of Vaishnavism.

 

It appears you have some grudge against the Gaudiyas who are a majority in this part of the forum, so it appears you are mostly here to insult and be arrogant.

 

My guess is you are a typically confused Hindu that grew up in a family that doesn't know which demigod is which and that it doesn't matter because they are all the same One brahman?

 

Akarma means the same thing in Sanskrit no matter which cult or sect you identify with.

 

Your claim that something is a Gaudiya interpretation simply makes you look like an uneducated fool.

[gHari 0]

 

[...]

Even though a karm is done for spiritual cause, it neverthless is karma and you are bound to reap a reaction and effect from it!!

That would mean that karma never ends, that we never escape the wheel of samsara; if karma begets karma always. Some actions do not produce bondage but liberation from bondage.

[Guest guest]

 

Here are some references to AKARMA in Sri Gita and Bhagavat Purana:

akarma-kṛt — without doing something; BG 3.5

akarma — inaction; BG 4.16

akarma — inaction; BG 4.18

 

 

BG 3.5: "No one ever is not performing karma even for a second, (akarma-krt) for everyone constantly engaged in karma arising out of prakrti's Gunas, as if possessed by them".

 

The key phrase is "a karmakrt na hi tishthati"

 

BG 4.18: "One who sees karma in akarma and akarma in karma is the real jnani, yogi and performer of all karmas".

 

--

[Vikram Ramsundar 0]

I can only paste one of my previous posts here. I think it holds true for this discussion as it did in the one in which I originally wrote it.

 

Here it comes:

 

A person is drawn to a particular religion or sect within a wider religious framework as a result of the impressions left on his or her consciousness by the experiences accumulated over millions upon millions of births. I am attracted to Krsna and Mahaprabhu because of my karmic inheritance - well, thanks to the Lord Himself for imbuing my mind with some attraction to Him, but that is another matter. In similar vein, this applies to a Saiva, a Sakta or an Advaitin. Many, many births from now, if I succeed in realising the perfection of Gaudiya Vedanta, hopefully, Radharani will be persuaded to allow me in Goloka Vrndavana so that I can perform my eternal service there. At that time, there will be no greater reality than Vraja-lila for my humble self.

 

For the revered Sri Hanumanji, no dhama is beyond Saketa/Ayodhya and no Lord above Bhagavan Sri Ramacandra. For Garudadeva, Catur-bhuja Sriman Narayana is Param Brahma, and the source of everything manifest and unmanifest. Likewise, for Nandisvara, Devadideva Mahadeva is the Supreme Lord, and there is no one higher than the blue-throated Lord with matted locks. For a Siva-bhakta who has attained Kailasa or Sadasivaloka, the service of Gauri-Sankara is second to none. And I may also add that to a follower of Advaita Vedanta like Sivananda Swami, who was accepted as a jivan-mukta (liberated even whilst still present in his body on earth), the Brahman effulgence is all. There was never, and there will never be a time when all of humanity will to one single spiritual ideal.

 

Hare Krsna

[Vikram Ramsundar 0]

God is infinite and unfathomable. He manifests to an individual worshipper in the form that best corresponds to that practitioner's psyche and karmic status. To seek to impose our own prejudices on Divinity by artificially metamorphosing the entire concept of the Absolute Truth into a reducible, black-and-white yes or no equation is so very unintelligent that nothing more needs to be added frankly. That attempt is in and of itself damning to those who persist in it.

 

One final word may be in order. The people who have got this irrepressible urge to proselytize vigorously and try to bring the whole world under their perverted control are as far away from God as the most hardened of atheists. Such folks are only fighting with themselves in the ultimate issue.

 

Radhe Radhe

[Guest guest]

 

You said there is no such thing a akarma.

I showed references in Sri Gita and Bhagavat to show you are wrong.

 

My guess is you are a typically confused Hindu that grew up in a family that doesn't know which demigod is which and that it doesn't matter because they are all the same One brahman?

Your claim that something is a Gaudiya interpretation simply makes you look like an uneducated fool.

 

Typical Gaudiya behavior calling all others as fool and usual Hinu bashing agenda. I've always wondered how the HKs resort to name calling like fools and rascals to Hindus and all others who don't necessarily have to agree with their point of view. I don't think this is very spiritual at all.

Gita and Bhagwatam certainly exdist before gaudiyas ever did.

But the interpretation and understanding of the verses of Gita vary. Having a material body you cannot be devoid of karma at all. What the verses do actually mean is if you are performing a certain karma with spiritual inclinations and surrendering its result to the Lord, then you have lesser chances of remaining entangled in the karmic cycle. Having said that, this spiritual karma is neverthless a karma! Not in the raw material sense maybe. Karma or action bears results. So does it. This is the basic fundamental principle. And Krsna does stress on karma in Gita. Where does Krsna says to Arjuna to forget the killing get a copy of BG and mridanga or go out for sankirtana? I haven't seen Krsna preaching that to Arjuna!

Anyways, I'm not trying to put down your beliefs. But as far as Hindus are ignorant fools or Hindu family practices are ignorant and all about so called demi-Gods, then I don't agree with this. And I'd rather abstain from writing back on this.

[Guest guest]

 

BG 3.5: "No one ever is not performing karma even for a second, (akarma-krt) for everyone constantly engaged in karma arising out of prakrti's Gunas, as if possessed by them".

 

The key phrase is "a karmakrt na hi tishthati"

 

BG 4.18: "One who sees karma in akarma and akarma in karma is the real jnani, yogi and performer of all karmas".

--

 

Yes agreed. And this process of "seeing" is not a simple one. Doesn't really come from book reading. Just like Krsna says see paramatma in all living creatures. How do you "see" or realize that? read this statement and simply believe in it? or come to a certain realization through experience? What is this experience?

[Guest guest]

Very nice post Vikram!!!

Totally agree! Thanks.

 

 

I can only paste one of my previous posts here. I think it holds true for this discussion as it did in the one in which I originally wrote it.

 

Here it comes:

 

A person is drawn to a particular religion or sect within a wider religious framework as a result of the impressions left on his or her consciousness by the experiences accumulated over millions upon millions of births. I am attracted to Krsna and Mahaprabhu because of my karmic inheritance - well, thanks to the Lord Himself for imbuing my mind with some attraction to Him, but that is another matter. In similar vein, this applies to a Saiva, a Sakta or an Advaitin. Many, many births from now, if I succeed in realising the perfection of Gaudiya Vedanta, hopefully, Radharani will be persuaded to allow me in Goloka Vrndavana so that I can perform my eternal service there. At that time, there will be no greater reality than Vraja-lila for my humble self.

 

For the revered Sri Hanumanji, no dhama is beyond Saketa/Ayodhya and no Lord above Bhagavan Sri Ramacandra. For Garudadeva, Catur-bhuja Sriman Narayana is Param Brahma, and the source of everything manifest and unmanifest. Likewise, for Nandisvara, Devadideva Mahadeva is the Supreme Lord, and there is no one higher than the blue-throated Lord with matted locks. For a Siva-bhakta who has attained Kailasa or Sadasivaloka, the service of Gauri-Sankara is second to none. And I may also add that to a follower of Advaita Vedanta like Sivananda Swami, who was accepted as a jivan-mukta (liberated even whilst still present in his body on earth), the Brahman effulgence is all. There was never, and there will never be a time when all of humanity will to one single spiritual ideal.

 

Hare Krsna

[Guest guest]

Another nice post Vikram! Your views are fair here and see well beyond the walls of narrow sectarian mentality!! Thanks.

 

 

God is infinite and unfathomable. He manifests to an individual worshipper in the form that best corresponds to that practitioner's psyche and karmic status. To seek to impose our own prejudices on Divinity by artificially metamorphosing the entire concept of the Absolute Truth into a reducible, black-and-white yes or no equation is so very unintelligent that nothing more needs to be added frankly. That attempt is in and of itself damning to those who persist in it.

 

One final word may be in order. The people who have got this irrepressible urge to proselytize vigorously and try to bring the whole world under their perverted control are as far away from God as the most hardened of atheists. Such folks are only fighting with themselves in the ultimate issue.

 

Radhe Radhe

[Guruvani 0]

There are many paths and many religions, many gods and many books of knowledge.

Some foolish people like to think that you can follow any path and everyone is going to end up at the same destination.

Well, that is just their wishful thinking.

 

Each path will take you to a particular destination and these destinations have comparitive gradations of higher and lower.

 

The Puranas and other books of knowledge given by self-realized sages and rishis have delineated the comparitive understanding of the different levels of consciousness that correspond to these different levels of existence.

 

Sure, everybody can pick and choose what faith or what religion or what yoga practice they choose, but they all produce a different result.

 

All roads don't lead to Rome.

 

Worshiping gods that keep you in the material world of birth and death is not the same as worshiping the Surpeme Personality of Godhead who can award mukti to his devotees.

[Guest guest]

 

These quotes are ok. Just like a lot of other things in Bhagwad Gita that we either haven't understood in the right sense or misinterpreted.

 

Right. Most who do manage to read a few of the vast collections of scriptures end up understanding the surface meaning, at best. Very few may understand the hidden meanings. Only the select (such as saints) might know the secret meanings and experience those meanings. May be it's best to follow the sayings of such super souls.

[Guest guest]

 

Yes agreed. And this process of "seeing" is not a simple one. Doesn't really come from book reading. Just like Krsna says see paramatma in all living creatures. How do you "see" or realize that? read this statement and simply believe in it? or come to a certain realization through experience? What is this experience?

 

Indeed, there's no substitute for experience. It's difficult to describe it. How does one describe the taste of sugar? It's sweet, yes, but that doesn't convey anything. It can only be experienced by tasting.

 

So, at best, what can be discussed and shared is the perceptions, perspectives and so forth. Hopefully, that'd help each in their own personal quest of the truth.

[Guest guest]

 

A person is drawn to a particular religion or sect within a wider religious framework as a result of the impressions left on his or her consciousness by the experiences accumulated over millions upon millions of births.

 

Beautiful !!

[Guest guest]

 

To seek to impose our own prejudices on Divinity by artificially metamorphosing the entire concept of the Absolute Truth into a reducible, black-and-white yes or no equation is so very unintelligent that nothing more needs to be added frankly. That attempt is in and of itself damning to those who persist in it.

 

Much as an observer or a theosopher ought to study all the methods, a practitioner ought to stick to one method to succeed in Sadhana. The discussions hopefully help one in one's quest of truth by disseminating ideas, perceptions and perspectives. One ought to filter out the contents to the extent required. It's not unusual for a Bhakti margi to show a fierce devotion, one must appreciate the devotion and ignore the inconvenient. It's not unusual for a Jnan (Gyan) Margi to display anger or irritation, one must appreciate the concern and ignore the inconvenient.

[Guest guest]

 

There are many paths and many religions, many gods and many books of knowledge.

Some foolish people like to think that you can follow any path and everyone is going to end up at the same destination.

Well, that is just their wishful thinking.

 

Each path will take you to a particular destination and these destinations have comparitive gradations of higher and lower.

 

The Puranas and other books of knowledge given by self-realized sages and rishis have delineated the comparitive understanding of the different levels of consciousness that correspond to these different levels of existence.

 

Sure, everybody can pick and choose what faith or what religion or what yoga practice they choose, but they all produce a different result.

 

All roads don't lead to Rome.

 

Worshiping gods that keep you in the material world of birth and death is not the same as worshiping the Surpeme Personality of Godhead who can award mukti to his devotees.

 

Again the favorite HK "foolish" word!!! Of course all the other paths and worshipers come into the HK "foolish" category unless they are following you! This is pretty obvious.

 

As far as your alegory about "all roads don't lead to Rome" is concerned, the truth is that there can be more than one road that can lead to Rome!!!

Of course the road leading to Vrindavan is not leading to Rome for sure! But that is a different story. Important is that you reach there first.

But hey what's that path to reach this Godhead? I suppose its the Hare Krsna path ONLY chanting the Hare Krsna mantra and following Gaudiya teacings only?? Can I come to God through Christ? Can I get mukti through Lord Shiva??? What do you think?

 

You said getting mukti only through Godhead (actually I don't find any such term in Vedas, but doesn't matter). Is Rama Godhead? Can I get mukti if I'm a Ram bhakta only and don't pray to Krsna? Please answer this for my clarification. What if I want to worship only Ram or only Shiva?? Can I get mukti??? Thanks.

[Guest guest]

Yes nice post. Unless of course the inconvinient remains as prominent.

 

 

Much as an observer or a theosopher ought to study all the methods, a practitioner ought to stick to one method to succeed in Sadhana. The discussions hopefully help one in one's quest of truth by disseminating ideas, perceptions and perspectives. One ought to filter out the contents to the extent required. It's not unusual for a Bhakti margi to show a fierce devotion, one must appreciate the devotion and ignore the inconvenient. It's not unusual for a Jnan (Gyan) Margi to display anger or irritation, one must appreciate the concern and ignore the inconvenient.

[Guruvani 0]

 

Again the favorite HK "foolish" word!!! Of course all the other paths and worshipers come into the HK "foolish" category unless they are following you! This is pretty obvious.

 

As far as your alegory about "all roads don't lead to Rome" is concerned, the truth is that there can be more than one road that can lead to Rome!!!

Of course the road leading to Vrindavan is not leading to Rome for sure! But that is a different story. Important is that you reach there first.

But hey what's that path to reach this Godhead? I suppose its the Hare Krsna path ONLY chanting the Hare Krsna mantra and following Gaudiya teacings only?? Can I come to God through Christ? Can I get mukti through Lord Shiva??? What do you think?

 

You said getting mukti only throug(actually I don't find any such term in Vedas, but doesn't matter).h Godhead Is Rama Godhead? Can I get mukti if I'm a Ram bhakta only and don't pray to Krsna? Please answer this for my clarification. What if I want to worship only Ram or only Shiva?? Can I get mukti??? Thanks.

You said:

 

(actually I don't find any such term in Vedas, but doesn't matter).

In the Bhagavat Purana, Lord Siva explains that actually the Personality of Godhead is beyond the range of the Vedas.

 

Lord Shiva is glorifying Lord Vishnu after being bewildered by Lord Vishnu in the form of Mohini murti.

 

Siva speaks to Devi:

 

Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 8.12.44

 

yaḿ mām apṛcchas tvam upetya yogāt

samā-sahasrānta upārataḿ vai

sa eṣa sākṣāt puruṣaḥ purāṇo

na yatra kālo viśate na vedaḥ

 

SYNONYMS

yam — about whom; mām — from me; apṛcchaḥ — inquired; tvam — you; upetya — coming near me; yogāt — from performing mystic yoga; samā — years; sahasra-ante — at the end of one thousand; upāratam — ceasing; vai — indeed; saḥ — He; eṣaḥ — here is; sākṣāt — directly; puruṣaḥ — the Supreme Person; purāṇaḥ — the original; na — not; yatra — where; kālaḥ — eternal time; viśate — can enter; na — nor; vedaḥ — the Vedas.

 

 

TRANSLATION

When I finished performing mystic yoga for one thousand years, you asked me upon whom I was meditating. Now, here is that Supreme Person to whom time has no entrance and who the Vedas cannot understand.

 

So, even the great God Lord Siva admits that Lord Vishnu is not even known through the Vedas.

 

Only Vishna-tattva can give Mukti.

Lord Ramacandra is Vishnu-tattva so he can give mukti.

 

Lord Siva is not Vishnu-tattva. He is Siva-tattva and only has lordship over the material universe. He cannot award mukti.

 

 

Lord Shiva himself says "mukti pradata sarvesam Vishnu eva na samsaya." One who wants mukti has to approach Lord Visnu.

[Guruvani 0]

 

But hey what's that path to reach this Godhead? I suppose its the Hare Krsna path ONLY chanting the Hare Krsna mantra and following Gaudiya teacings only?? Can I come to God through Christ?

 

Different religions and different paths lead to different rewards.

 

I don't know where Christians go.

 

But, in Vaishnava theology there is first level of mukti is impersonal liberation into oneness of brahman.

Then, there is liberation into the spiritual planets of Vaikuntha.

Vaikuntha is world of Lord Narayana.

Ayodhya is the world of Lord Rama

Goloka is the world of Lord Krishna.

 

Different devotees of the Lord will attain mukti into the different planets and different realms of the different forms of the Lord.

 

So, the Kingdom of God has different levels and different planets where the different forms of the Lord presides.

 

The highest realm of Lord Siva is not eternal and at the time of universal pralaya everything is destroyed and Lord Siva returns to Vaikuntha to worship Lord Vishnu until the next universal creation.

 

All the planets of Surya, Indra, Agni, Candra etc. are all destroyed at the end of time and these devas all merge back into the body of Lord Vishnu.

[Guest guest]

 

You said:

In the Bhagavat Purana, Lord Siva explains that actually the Personality of Godhead is beyond the range of the Vedas.

In the Bhagwat Purana Lord Brahma is also hailing Lord Shiva as the Supreme controller of the Universe beyond material nature!

 

 

Lord Shiva is glorifying Lord Vishnu after being bewildered by Lord Vishnu in the form of Mohini murti.

 

In Mahabharata Lord Krsna is glorifying Lord Vishnu as thus too after worshipping him for months at a strech standing on one leg!!! In Shiv Gita Rama is glorifying Shiva as thus after seeing Lord Shiva's universal form and feeling afraid falling to the ground in dandvats again and again singing his glory and saying that He (Lord Shiva) is the giver of five kinds of mukti!!!"

 

 

 

I think this is a Gaudiya / Vaishnava belief only. I think Lord Shiva can fully award mukti and is not just lord of "material" nature. He is the controler of three gunas, but is beyond them. He is not affected by the three gunas.

And no he is not in the mode of Tamas or so preached 'ignorance'!

 

Markandeya Rishi was liberated by lord Shiva and rescued from Yamaraja when his age was over. Markandeya Rishi was born by the grace of Lord Shiva, but his age was only 16. He left for the forest when he was very small to worship intensely Lord Shiva. And when Yamraja came to take his life away, Lord Shiva appeared and saved him from sure death.

[Vikram Ramsundar 0]

My humble pranams to all.

 

The Gaudiya understanding of Lord Siva's topmost abode of Sadasivaloka is delineated in the Brahma-samhita and Srila Sanatana Gosvamipada's Brhad-bhagavatamrta. It is clear to any one with half-a-brain that Sadasivaloka is an eternal dhama, beyond the material world, and the Param-guru of all Sarasvata Vaisnavas, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura Prabhupada, himself uses the term indestructible to describe the loka of Mahadeva, in his English commentary on the Brahma-samhita. Sivaloka is not destroyed by any means at the time of pralaya or maha-pralaya for that matter. Only a nincompoop would dare argue otherwise.

 

Of course, there is a modern deviant "Gaudiya" sect which has, over the years, mutated into an apa-sampradaya, and very few individuals who owe their sole acquaintance with Sanatana Dharma to that particular quarter know any Sanskrit whatsoever. Their knowledge, or should I say lack of it, of Dharma is palpable to any normal person, since they only consult BBT translations, or what passes for translations, as their only reference material. These people are for the most part rude, arrogant, and often succumb to the worst type of sectarianism one can find, almost on a par with violent Jihadis or zealous evangelical missionaries. Devotees from the traditional Gaudiya Parivaras or different Gaudiya Mathas largely ignore them for being so ignorant and uncouth. There are some good, reasonable, thoughtful Vaisnavas even from the mission concerned, but these tend to be in the minority.

 

If any of you friends who are outsiders to the Gaudiya sampradaya wish to know in any real depth our actual views on the subject matters being debated here, I suggest you extract this information from senior Vaisnava practitioners who have significant realisation to their credit, not from a low-consciousness life form who spends most of his time insulting and attempting to defeat anyone and everyone who disagrees with him.

 

The fact is that both Sadasivaloka and Brahman are just as real and eternal as Vaikuntha. Where one wants to go is a matter of faith and personal preference, and each sadhaka should choose his sadhya/desired destination for himself, and follow the sadhana/spiritual practice required in order to attain that goal. Sanatana Dharma is absolute and all-encompassing. Not many people can fully grasp such a broad concept. Those accustomed to simplistic black-and-white paradigms are definitely ineligible, unless they drop their reductionistic idiocies and embrace a more universal and inclusive conception of Divinity.

 

Hari Om and Hari Bol!

[Guest guest]

 

Different religions and different paths lead to different rewards.

 

I don't know where Christians go.

 

Christian heaven.

 

 

But, in Vaishnava theology there is first level of mukti is impersonal liberation into oneness of brahman.

Then, there is liberation into the spiritual planets of Vaikuntha.

Vaikuntha is world of Lord Narayana.

Ayodhya is the world of Lord Rama

Goloka is the world of Lord Krishna.

 

When Krsna says in Bhagwat Gita about this, does he specify Goloka? But if he is Narayan himself, why not Vaikuntha? And if he is Ram himself, why not Ayodhya? As far as i can understand, Ayodhya is a physical city in India! And Goswami Tulasidas sings "Basi Baikunth, Param Pad paye" He is saying that one can reach to the "param pad" or the highest abode/place in Vaikunth through the mercy of Lord Hanuman who will help him reach Lord Rama and his abode Vaikunth!!

 

So this clarifyes that if I worship Rama, I can get complete mukti too?!

Thanks.

 

The highest realm of Lord Siva is not eternal and at the time of universal pralaya everything is destroyed and Lord Siva returns to Vaikuntha to worship Lord Vishnu until the next universal creation.

Where is this written? I've never heard this that Shiva's abode is not 'eternal'. As far as I've known, Shiva destroys the creation on pralaya. Does he have to destroy his own abode too? :/ Why? For what reason does Shiva destroys his own abode? Is it a materialistic plane? If Shiva's abode is a spiritual plane, why does he have to destroy it? What happens to all the ganas and saints who live in his abode? What happens to the Nandi and Godess Parvati? Where does she have to go then if his abode is destroyed? Where does Lord Ganesh has to go then? Does he go with Shiva to vaikuntha? I couldn't find anywhere ganesh worshipping Krsna in Vaikuntha.

Why can't Lord Shiva maintain his abode? So then he has to go back to Vaikunth to worship? I think he submerges into his long samadhi.

Can you please clarify where I can find a scripture accept by all, not only the Vaishnavs, that Shiva's abode gets destroyed and then he has to go to Vaikuntha. This scripture, should be important and hence agreeable by both Vaishnavs and Shaivas, Just like Bhagvat Gita is acceptable by all usually.

Sorry for many questions and that I am unaware about some scriptures. This is intriguing. Thanks.