Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org
Sign in to follow this  
vmsunder

Lord Shiva is Ultimate

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

happened to read several article on Lord Siva and Vishnu

 

In the analysis of Shaivism is totally wrong and onesided. You cant view Lord Siva thru bhagavatham. Bhagavatham is a collection of stories. it may be noted that Bhagavatham has to be used when one chooses to go deeply into Vaishnavism.

 

The Saiva Philosophy is the choicest product of the Dravidian intellect. It is the most elaborate, influential and undoubtedly the most intrisically valuable of all religions of India. It is peculiarly the South Indian and Tamil Religion . - (Dr.G.U. Pope)

 

Please read the research of Arthur Avalon (Sir John Woodroffe) on Saktham worship - which highlights Siva-Sakthi is the ultimate supreme lords worshiped very long back.

Infact in addition to Vedas - which does not directly speak about Siva or Sakthi and speaks about Rudras only, please look into Saiva Aagamas which is largely ignored and few of them got translated to french people long back - you may find these info. in the web.

 

 

There is nowhere in ancient history about any trace of Vaishnavism, ancient most discoveries at Indus valley civilisation highlighted/unearthed Siva Worship prevelent at the time.

There is no history about "Namam" (Three vertical lines) used by Vaishnavites, it is a recent phenomenon.

There is no reference of goddess Raadha in Bhagavatham - pl enlighten me if you find it anywhere.

Also note the Guru of lord Rama is Vasista - who is a Siva devotee (vasista kumbothbava gowthamarya muneendhra devaarchitha sekaraya - siva panchatchara stothram)

Unlike Saivism, there is no worthy philosophical work in Vaishnavism except the Bhagavath gita - which is given by Vyasa only (Vyasa told Bharatham Story in which Sanjaya tells Dhrudhrashtra on what Krishna tells to Arjuna), it is ultimately the knowledge of Vyasa only - if u take it as a Story. whereas u can find Tirumandhiram in Tamil and various Sidhdhas have given various tantric and mantric and yogic and philosiphical secrets.

Even in that - Arjuna worshiped Shiva for Pasupathasthra

Lord Krishna's temple in Dwaraka - has got the Goddess (parvathi - worshiped by Krishna) temple in it.

 

In almost all avatars Lord Vishnu worshiped Shiva, infact as per puranas almost all avatars of Lord Vishnu ended by Lord Shiva only.

The Sudarsana Chakram in the hand of Vishnu is gifted by Lord Shiva after Vishnu offered one of His eyes to lord Shiva (Lord Shiva created Sudarsan Chakra by drawing its picture on water and land thru his toe to kill Jalandharasura).

 

Narasimha - by Sarabeswarar

Vamana - Sattanatha

Krisna - by Dhurvasa Rishi (devotee of lord Shiva) etc.

 

The temple purana of Tiruvarur in Tamilnadu says the Shiva linga worshiped by Vishnu is kept there

 

In Vaitheeswaran koil Lord Ram worshiped Shiva

In Kasi Viswanath was worshiped by Lord Vishnu (Vageesa Vishnu Sura Sevitha Patha Peetam - Kasi vishwanathashtakam)

 

 

Krishnua or Lord Ram are all human lives idolised subsequently because of the quality and the skills they portrayed.

Krishna's quality can be obtained by anybody who practices Ashtanga Yoga - first understand Ashtanga Yoga and then people may comment - Please refer to Patanjaly Yoga Suktham. Also the Arthur Avalons "Serpent Power" and the English translation of St.Tirumoolars "Tirumanthiram".

 

 

Also, Lookinto the Mahabharatham - given by Vyasa

 

St.Vyasasa gave birth to Dhrutharasthra and Pandu

St Vyasa was a vishnu worshiper - so tried to highlight Vishnu in all possible ways - Pl go thru the history behind "Vyasashtagam" to know how he was corrected.

 

Why dont you have a look into the Uthara Ramayana what sort of divine quality u see.

 

The Vedas talk only about Rudra - and moreover the Vedas are brough into India by the Iranian (Aryan)invaders, the Saiva Worship was prevelent even before the Vedic Period, the Vedas principally worships Agni, Vayu, Prithvi, Appu, Sun, Moon etc.

 

Seeing the supremacy of the Prevelant Shaivist philosophy in the Indian subcontinent, the invaders penetrated into the existing system while obsorbing most of the prevelent system- thats how the present day Hinduism was born. I think u dont want to go deep into the reality and accept the Historical findings. Have a look into the following research reports.

 

geocities.com/shivaperuman/origin.html

dlshq.org/download/lordsiva.htm

 

Also Veda Vyasa having uttered that Vishnu is supreme, was paralysed and prayed for Vishnu who corrected his mistakes and asked him to worship Shiva - there came Vyasaashtakam - sung by 'Veda" Vyasa himself.

 

Also, after conquering Mahabharath war - Krishna knowing the sins committed by killing thousands of lives insisted all the pandavas to worship Shiva at Ketharnath

 

Lord Rama worshiped Shiva to get rid of the sins committed by him in Ravana Samharam.

 

All Vedas worshiped Lord Shiva - Please refer to the Sthala puranam of Vedaranyam in Tamilnadu.

 

On Radha

Most of the stories attibuted to Krishna are pure imagination by staunch poetic devotees. While we need respect the bhakthi involved u cant give importance as if they were part of Srimad Bhagavatham. There is no other source except bhagavatham to know as to what

happened in Krishnavatharam. Please refer the "Krishna the man and his philosphy" by Osho.

 

The Bhagavath Gita

In a way, the Gita is collection of philosphy by Vyasa. Request you to note while it is the most published philosophical work because it was part of the Aryan invaders work, while there are other Great philosophical master pieces like -

 

Patanjali Yoga Suktham and

Saiva Aagamams - in Sanskrit,

Thirumandiram - by St Tirummolar - Tamil

Siddhar Paadalgal - Tamil

Thevaram and Thiruvasakam - Tamil

 

and many more

 

I request you have you ever had a chance of looking into the following

 

1. Research done in Indus Valley Civilisation

2. Kashmiri Saivm

3. Tantric and Mantric researc done by Sir John Woodroffe

4. Aryan Invasion in India and its impact in Indian philosophy

 

But please have a look into the life these great scholars of recent time

 

Sri Bhagwan Ramana Maharishi

Sri Bhagwan Ramalinga Adigal

Srimad Pamban Swamigal

Sri Sivanandha

 

 

I would like to clarify the following;

 

 

The Saiva Philosophy is the choicest product of the Dravidian intellect. It is the most elaborate, influential and undoubtedly the most intrisically valuable of all religions of India. It is peculiarly the South Indian and Tamil Religion . - (Dr.G.U. Pope)

 

While I am not a scholar in Saiva philosphy. But very minimum knowledge in Ancient Indian History and the Aryan theory and Saiva sidhantha knowledge itself suffice to conclude that what you have mentioned that "Shiva is next only to Krishna" is wrong.

Also, the purpose of stories are to impart a strong bhakthi in the devotees mind, one should go deep in his soul to seek the truth, after a period of time there will be no need for the form to worship, thats y u can find Siva being represented by Siva Lingam - a Roop(a)roopa form - u can attribute it either to a form or a non-form, and is denoted as "unseen and unfathomable light (Arutperunjyothi) - Please refer to Thiruvannamalai/Tiruvannamalai Temple History - Sthalapuranam.

A small quote from Thirumanthiram (translated with my little knowledge)

Seevan enna Sivan enna Verilai

Seevanar Sivanaarai Arigilar

Seevanar Sivanaarai Arindhapin

Seevanar Sivanai Vittiruppare

Translate

There is no dual thinks like - soul and Siva

The soul does not know Siva

The moment the soul knows what is Siva

Then there is no soul - only Siva exists

The word (seevan - represent Soul - u can simply see that it orinated and just an extended prounciation of Sivan)

At last

My sincere namaskars and I am amazed at the pool of knowledge you peopele show case in Vedic philosophy. And I request you to sincerely look into the untouched portion of Aagamas and Saiva and Saktha philosophy in Ancient India and the Saiva Siddhantas. I am sure that you will be benefitted a lot like Sir John Woodroffe and many others. I was bit disappointed when I read Dan Brown's "The Da Vinci Code" He stopped his research with China and did not cross over to India. Kindly dont stop your research with a portion of sanskript Vaishnavist scriptures alone if you are a seeker.

 

 

If you like to worship lord Vishnu or Krishna - well and good - but get meditate and take permision from Lord Vishnu before u utter anything low about lord Shiva.

 

Thanks & regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shiva is ultimate - Ekam Param

 

Vishnu in the form of Narasimha was killed by Sarabeswara - Shiva

Vishnu in Vamana Viswaroopa - was ended by Sattanatha - Shiva

Vishnu in Krishnavatar - was ended by St Dhurvasa's curse - Shiva devotee.

 

Vishnu worshiped Shiva - for Sudarshan chakra

 

Vyasa - the most biased saint - finally gave up his sins by praying to Lord Shiva - pl refer Vyasashtakam

 

Vishnu - searched Shiva's feet in vain

 

Vedas - talk about Rudra (there are eleven Rudras - Ekadasa Rudras)

Siva + sakthi - Ardhanareeswara is the ultimate mistyc solution.

CERN studies the mystry behind Lord Nataraja (Shiva) statue.

Nataraja - dance symbolises - cosmic dance representing the five actions of the universe - creation, protection, destruction, Mayaa and Salvation.

 

Vedas - pl refer to Sri Ramakrishna - Vedas talk only about thrigunas (sat, rajas, thamas - these three are like thieves, the verses in Vedas are not ultimate - it helps to reach divine life - swarga after death by following certain rituals and rules thats all)

 

Maal Ayan theda, marai theda vanavar theda nindra kaalaiyum - Abhirami Andhathi - which says Siva Sakthi's foot is searched by Brahma, Vishnu and the Vedas alike)

Pleae note - even Vedas dont know - they too search.

 

Please Hatha yoga and the John woodroffes research and Dr G U Pope's research on Saivism

 

Lalitha sahasranamam says like this:

"Karanguli Nakothpanna Narayana dhasaakrithyai namaha"

Sivasakthi - from her 10 finger nails created the ten avatars of vishnu.

 

In Yogic growth - "Manipoorantha rudhitha - Vishnu Kranthi vibhethini'

While one raises his Kundalini thru Hatha yoga - it crosses the Vaikuntam - which is Vishnu Kranthi located near our Chest. (brahma - Brahma Kranthi near stomach portion, Vishnu - Chest portion, Rudra - between Eye brows - Aknja chakram)

 

These are yogic secrets, you have to learn from a Guru the techniques and the methods.

 

Thanks & regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly!! Only fools distinguish between the two. Both are declared by the Vedas as one Brahmswarup. Parbrahm Purshottam Bhagwan is the cause of all His forms. These include Vishnu and Shiva etc. There are Brahmas, Vishnus and Shiva in every single universe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mr vmsunder.... why is this thread named "Lord shiva is ultimate"?.... can you proove it?....... if not then ...... let vaishnavas worship vishnu as supreme........

 

as far as bhagavatam is concerned ..it says "whoever distinguishes between har and hari will go to the hell called raurava"

 

as far as lalitha sahasranama is concerned it says that to a thousand names of vishnu one of shiva would suffice and to a thousand names of shiva one of devi would suffice....... here again shiva is not said to be supreme.....

 

 

so......

 

beside when scriptures say that shiva killed vishnu.....they are talking about tattvas .....shiva = bhram (ekam one only ...it is a state of realisation)..

 

vishnu(vishwa + anu)= that which permeades every atom of the universe =space

 

thus duality can exist only in space ..... and when oneness (shiva) is realised there is no other........thus when scriptures talk about shiva killing vishnu ..it means duality giving way for the realisation of one.....

 

however you have to concede that most of us are trapped in a duality experience .....and therefore its pointless talk abbout oneness ... because if oneness existed for everyone then who would be speaking to whom?.. therefore ramanuj's theory is sound when he talks of dwaitadwait... besides most theory is useless .......and if one follows ones gurus properly he would be blessed with direct experience and then no doubts would remain ........personally ... i would recommend vaishnavisam more than shaivaism simply because vaishnavaism increases bhakti and the feeling of surrender .........and also it places strict rules of conduct and food habits which are essential if one wants quick progress .......besides vaishnavisam is karmically the safest as if one doesnt achieve liberation he doesnt suffer much as he is karmically not involved in violent actions like animal slaughter or aggression ....as these would otherwise bring grave sufferings..........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear Sir

I have given the conclusions of many historians and saints words as proof for why I concluded that Lord Shiva alone is supreme.

 

However, heartiest thanks and I became fan of yours for the way in which you replied showing great amount of bhakthi and reasoning.

 

Namaskars

Vm sunder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Debate has been going on between vishnu-shiva supremacy from daya of dawn. But bad news for some sect (particularly to saivatees) is that Great Acharyas like Ramanujacharya, Madhvacharya, Vallabhacharya, Nimbarkacharya, Vedanta Desika etc.. have proved clearly that "Lord Narayana is Supreme Brahman" and they have defeated shaiva-scholars , saiva-philosophies.

So no use in debating on the matter which has already been solved & proved.

 

Moreover, we are all petty people. We have to accept the sayings of acharyas. Acharyas say "Lord Narayana" is Supreme.

 

Moreover Puranas are just symbolisation. Each purana hails each diff God is supreme. So debating on basis of puranas is foolish & mindless. Moreover, Saivatees dont tend to come out of "shiva purana". Wat else can they do ? Because apart from shiva-purana they dont have anything in their hands.

 

All the 4 great philosophies - Suddhadvaita, Vishistadvaita, Dvaitadvaitha, Dvaitha point out only "Lord Narayana" as Supreme. So saying that these 4 philosophies are meaningless by shaivatees is foolishness, because all these acharyas have already defeated shaivas and proved "Lord Vishnu" is supreme.

 

Om Namo Narayanaya

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me narrate one incident. When Lord Rama worshipped Lord Siva at Rameshwaram, the people there were very happy and said, "All glories to Lord Siva, the lord of Rama." The demigods were not at all happy by this and they appeared in the sky and said, " Why are you distinguishing between Lord Rama and Lord Siva? They are equal." Immediately the siva linga burst and Lord Siva appeared from it and said, "You are all fools and rascals. Don't you know that Lord Rama is my ishwara, my ista deva?" He actually got quite angry that the people were placing him in a position the same level or higher than Lord Rama.

 

The position of Lord Siva is explained in the Srimad Bhagavatam. Lord Visnu is like milk. And Lord Siva is like yogurt. Milk and yogurt are basically the same thing, but yogurt is the transformed form of milk. It is not original.

 

Vaishnavanam yatha sambuh. Lord Siva ki Jaya!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmph ... While Hindus fight among themselves whether Lord Shiva or Lord Vishnu is supreme, enemies of Hindusm surrounds them from all sides - from Pakistan, Bangladesh, from foreigners who come to preach and convert and from Chinese Atheists who slowly crawling into Tibet as we speak. :crazy:

 

Anyway, here's for reading purpose, probably related to Lord Shiva.

 

Source : http://www.hinduismtoday.com/archives/1991/08/1991-08-09.shtml

 

[Qoute]

This wilderness mystic - a modern day miko, Shinto priestess - peacefully haunting the sacred hill valleys of Japan is not different from the revered Hindu shamans of Nepal or India. Both can ply the palpable pure energy that interconnects all form - nagare in Shinto texts and Satchidananda in Sanskrit. Both use it to heal.

The Shiva-like Japanese Deity Fudo Myoo re-echoes this pan-Asian interlacing. Like Shiva, Fudo Myoo specially befriends the recluse, mystic and mountain hermit, granting boons and powers. Fudo Myoo, explains Dr. Carmen Blacker, is the "central and paramount figure in the group of divinites known as the Godai Myoo or Five Great Bright Kings, who in esoteric Buddhism stand as emanations, or modes of activity, of the Buddha. His long hair hangs in a coil over his left shoulder." Like Siva Nataraja, He is always ringed with fire.

The ichiko or Japanese shaman sees Fudomyoo as his own most interior Self and meditates on this essential oneness just as the Saivite tantric seeks to merge with Shiva-ness within. "Fudo is frequently represented by his attribute, an erect sword," continues Dr. Blacker, "twined about by the dragon Kurikara," not unlike Shiva entwined by a serpent and often represented by his trident alone.

"The halo of flames which surrounds Fudo is the same fire which the ascetic must kindle in himself. Here again is surely a reminder of the kundalini snake which as it rises up the spine of the yogi confers upon him heat and transformed sexual energy. As it writhes spirally upwards round Fudo's erect sword, we see the shakti or feminine energizing force in its traditional serpent aspect. Once again we meet with this mysterious coincidence of images, so far unexplained, between India and Japan."

[/Qoute]

 

Learn to be open-minded and see similarities inside and outside India. Only then Hindusm will survive. Otherwise, Hindusm will perish and partially will be because of Hindus also.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Vishnu and "Shiva" (Rudra, the Destroyer God) are just two different forms of Brahman (Whom the Shaivas call "Shiva" and the Vaishnavas call "Narayana").

unfortunately, majority of these people have failed the entire teaching of vedic religion. thank you for confirming maybe they can learn from you or maybe they wont and will be too busy debating rather then following vedic religion

 

it is absolutely a shame that all of these debaters since historical times have never grasped what the Vedic religion taught- there is no difference between shiva and vishnu. they are one.and you have their very incarnations here on this board who dont understand their own scriptures and religion either and spend hours of their time debating like little babies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

vmsunder

 

your claims are a load of bs. the dravidian aryan theory has no basis. they are language groups not races. the aryan theory was a british theory so you might as well just stop promoting your non sense here.

 

plus according to the so called aryan theorists, vishnu and krishna are "non aryan" gods which would refute your entire claim.plus vaishnava theology has had much popularity among the tamils and they along with vedic gods are mentioned in sacred tamil epics which date to 200 bc.

 

 

vaishnavas and shaivas form a complete whole with their roots from the same culture in india.there is no racial difference between the two sects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

unfortunately, majority of these people have failed the entire teaching of vedic religion. thank you for confirming maybe they can learn from you or maybe they wont and will be too busy debating rather then following vedic religion

 

it is absolutely a shame that all of these debaters since historical times have never grasped what the Vedic religion taught- there is no difference between shiva and vishnu. they are one.and you have their very incarnations here on this board who dont understand their own scriptures and religion either and spend hours of their time debating like little babies.

 

With all respect to you-

Lord Vishnu and Lord Shiva cannot be one. Why does it say vaishnavanam yatha sambuh- Lord Shiva is the greatest Vaishnava? It is like milk and yogurt. Yogurt is the transformed form of milk. Milk can become yogurt but yogurt can not become milk. I hope you see greatness in the servant also. Lord Shiva is the greatest of all Vaishnavas. He is respected from lowly people such as the ghosts and demons to high Vaishnavas. All glories to Lord Shiva the greatest Vaishnava who is known as Gopishwar Mahadeva. If Lord Shiva gives me one drop of his mercy I will consider myself extremely fortunate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

With all respect to you-

Lord Vishnu and Lord Shiva cannot be one. Why does it say vaishnavanam yatha sambuh- Lord Shiva is the greatest Vaishnava? It is like milk and yogurt. Yogurt is the transformed form of milk. Milk can become yogurt but yogurt can not become milk. I hope you see greatness in the servant also. Lord Shiva is the greatest of all Vaishnavas. He is respected from lowly people such as the ghosts and demons to high Vaishnavas. All glories to Lord Shiva the greatest Vaishnava who is known as Gopishwar Mahadeva. If Lord Shiva gives me one drop of his mercy I will consider myself extremely fortunate.

this is what i meant when i said its a shame that people havent grasped vedism. they are one the vedic text say all a part of supreme reality. they are just different forms.vishnu is infinite and so is shiva. it doesnt take a scientist to grasp this concept.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

this is what i meant when i said its a shame that people havent grasped vedism. they are one the vedic text say all a part of supreme reality. they are just different forms.vishnu is infinite and so is shiva. it doesnt take a scientist to grasp this concept.

 

Well said. But unless we differentiate and put my God over your God, how will the small sets survive? ;):idea:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

this is what i meant when i said its a shame that people havent grasped vedism. they are one the vedic text say all a part of supreme reality. they are just different forms.vishnu is infinite and so is shiva. it doesnt take a scientist to grasp this concept.

 

People with Wisdom will understand and accept this. People with Ego, will not. :eek4:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As Shiva, Vishnu and Brahma we had a kind of trimurty in the old times in Europe : Esus, Taranis and Teutates ; 3 major "celtic" gods ruling before the roman and greek civilization took place or better say the Christian civilization. There also where a lot of greek gods before christianity came. And also what about the Egyptian "trimurty" Isis, Osiris and Anubis.

 

I believe that in the old times there were many gods and demi gods all around the world. Then came Christianity which perturbated things maybe, and war religions in the 16th century... I believe that Vishnu is a product of christianity in modern Hinduism (many avatar going on a linear time, from Matsya the fish who saved Jonas in the bible etc...). Hinduism now is based on love and worship of only one god Baghwan. Because you Indians think that Shiva or Vishnu are proceding from one god (Bagwan : they are incarnations of Baghwan) and that Dharma is ruling I think.

Well, I also think Shiva is more ultimate or closer to truth because I think that some coins with the head of Shiva were dicovered in the ancient city of Mohendjodaro in Pakistan or around the Indus Valley. I think Vishnu is fake. Or not fake, but a god with less archeological evidence and issued from the Messiah concept -saver of the world-.

 

The old greek writers (who were not famous because not recognized by Rome and Cotholic empire) like Iamboulos etc... wrote about the greek gods at that time. Iamboulos says that they were kings, from flesh like you and me, ruling at a very old time ; they were fighters, very powerful humans.

 

Well, all this drive me to a question if I may ask in this topic : Could Krishna be Christ-na or something like that... This is something I am wondering as it is said per rumors that Jesus Christ came to India... Maybe Krishna and Christ is the same person... well, I find this similarity in names very weird...

 

Thank you for your attention, hoping not to put the web on fire and hoping to get some response...

 

Regards,

 

Eternity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

As Shiva, Vishnu and Brahma we had a kind of trimurty in the old times in Europe : Esus, Taranis and Teutates ; 3 major "celtic" gods ruling before the roman and greek civilization took place or better say the Christian civilization. There also where a lot of greek gods before christianity came. And also what about the Egyptian "trimurty" Isis, Osiris and Anubis.

 

I believe that in the old times there were many gods and demi gods all around the world. Then came Christianity which perturbated things maybe, and war religions in the 16th century... I believe that Vishnu is a product of christianity in modern Hinduism (many avatar going on a linear time, from Matsya the fish who saved Jonas in the bible etc...). Hinduism now is based on love and worship of only one god Baghwan. Because you Indians think that Shiva or Vishnu are proceding from one god (Bagwan : they are incarnations of Baghwan) and that Dharma is ruling I think.

Well, I also think Shiva is more ultimate or closer to truth because I think that some coins with the head of Shiva were dicovered in the ancient city of Mohendjodaro in Pakistan or around the Indus Valley. I think Vishnu is fake. Or not fake, but a god with less archeological evidence and issued from the Messiah concept -saver of the world-.

 

The old greek writers (who were not famous because not recognized by Rome and Cotholic empire) like Iamboulos etc... wrote about the greek gods at that time. Iamboulos says that they were kings, from flesh like you and me, ruling at a very old time ; they were fighters, very powerful humans.

 

Well, all this drive me to a question if I may ask in this topic : Could Krishna be Christ-na or something like that... This is something I am wondering as it is said per rumors that Jesus Christ came to India... Maybe Krishna and Christ is the same person... well, I find this similarity in names very weird...

 

Thank you for your attention, hoping not to put the web on fire and hoping to get some response...

 

Regards,

 

Eternity

this is not true. hindus have always regarded vishnu, shiva as one as it is written in the scriptures.

 

i am sure there were hindus that saw vishnu, shiva as different gods but those were ones that did not read the scriptures or not well versed in them.

 

vishnu is not fake, vishnu is mentioned in the vedas.

 

hindus today are basing their beliefs off of vedic/vedantic aspect which believes god is one. while the hindus that worship many gods and believe in different gods are basing their belief off of puranic/mythology aspect which was very popular during the gupta era.

 

so hindus today who believe god is one etc... are actually following the older version of hinduism then the puranic hindus.

 

i feel that the puranas were meant to be for morals but people worship the gods in there literally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

As Shiva, Vishnu and Brahma we had a kind of trimurty in the old times in Europe : Esus, Taranis and Teutates ; 3 major "celtic" gods ruling before the roman and greek civilization took place or better say the Christian civilization. There also where a lot of greek gods before christianity came. And also what about the Egyptian "trimurty" Isis, Osiris and Anubis.

 

I believe that in the old times there were many gods and demi gods all around the world. Then came Christianity which perturbated things maybe, and war religions in the 16th century... I believe that Vishnu is a product of christianity in modern Hinduism (many avatar going on a linear time, from Matsya the fish who saved Jonas in the bible etc...). Hinduism now is based on love and worship of only one god Baghwan. Because you Indians think that Shiva or Vishnu are proceding from one god (Bagwan : they are incarnations of Baghwan) and that Dharma is ruling I think.

Well, I also think Shiva is more ultimate or closer to truth because I think that some coins with the head of Shiva were dicovered in the ancient city of Mohendjodaro in Pakistan or around the Indus Valley. I think Vishnu is fake. Or not fake, but a god with less archeological evidence and issued from the Messiah concept -saver of the world-.

 

The old greek writers (who were not famous because not recognized by Rome and Cotholic empire) like Iamboulos etc... wrote about the greek gods at that time. Iamboulos says that they were kings, from flesh like you and me, ruling at a very old time ; they were fighters, very powerful humans.

 

Well, all this drive me to a question if I may ask in this topic : Could Krishna be Christ-na or something like that... This is something I am wondering as it is said per rumors that Jesus Christ came to India... Maybe Krishna and Christ is the same person... well, I find this similarity in names very weird...

 

Thank you for your attention, hoping not to put the web on fire and hoping to get some response...

 

Regards,

 

Eternity

this is not true. hindus have always regarded vishnu, shiva as one as it is written in the scriptures.

 

i am sure there were hindus that saw vishnu, shiva as different gods but those were ones that did not read the scriptures or not well versed in them.

 

vishnu is not fake, vishnu is mentioned in the vedas.

 

hindus today are basing their beliefs off of vedic/vedantic aspect which beliefs god is one. while the hindus that worship many gods and believe in different gods are basing their belief off of puranic/mythology aspect which was very popular during the gupta era.

 

so hindus today who believe god is one etc... are actually following the older version of hinduism then the puranic hindus.

 

i feel that the puranas were meant to be for morals but people worship the gods in there.

 

i do agree that vaishnavas have made vishnu/krishna very christian like but the bhagavad gita was written before the bible. krishna was a diety who was originally associated with the upanishadic philosophy and later on he became very messiah like. but many say that jesus is a copy cat of krishna. also there were a lot of other saviour types who had similar characteristics as jesus etc....

 

 

krishna and jesus are not the same though, there lies are very different from each other except for some similarities.

 

jesus never came to india. there is not even any evidence that he existed according to many. plus krishna is mentioned in ancient writings that date back to 4bc before any supposed jesus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

As Shiva, Vishnu and Brahma we had a kind of trimurty in the old times in Europe : Esus, Taranis and Teutates ; 3 major "celtic" gods ruling before the roman and greek civilization took place or better say the Christian civilization. There also where a lot of greek gods before christianity came. And also what about the Egyptian "trimurty" Isis, Osiris and Anubis.

 

I believe that in the old times there were many gods and demi gods all around the world. Then came Christianity which perturbated things maybe, and war religions in the 16th century... I believe that Vishnu is a product of christianity in modern Hinduism (many avatar going on a linear time, from Matsya the fish who saved Jonas in the bible etc...). Hinduism now is based on love and worship of only one god Baghwan. Because you Indians think that Shiva or Vishnu are proceding from one god (Bagwan : they are incarnations of Baghwan) and that Dharma is ruling I think.

Well, I also think Shiva is more ultimate or closer to truth because I think that some coins with the head of Shiva were dicovered in the ancient city of Mohendjodaro in Pakistan or around the Indus Valley. I think Vishnu is fake. Or not fake, but a god with less archeological evidence and issued from the Messiah concept -saver of the world-.

 

The old greek writers (who were not famous because not recognized by Rome and Cotholic empire) like Iamboulos etc... wrote about the greek gods at that time. Iamboulos says that they were kings, from flesh like you and me, ruling at a very old time ; they were fighters, very powerful humans.

 

Well, all this drive me to a question if I may ask in this topic : Could Krishna be Christ-na or something like that... This is something I am wondering as it is said per rumors that Jesus Christ came to India... Maybe Krishna and Christ is the same person... well, I find this similarity in names very weird...

 

Thank you for your attention, hoping not to put the web on fire and hoping to get some response...

 

Regards,

 

Eternity

this is not true. hindus have always regarded vishnu, shiva as one as it is written in the scriptures.

 

i am sure there were hindus that saw vishnu, shiva as different gods but those were ones that did not read the scriptures or not well versed in them.

 

vishnu is not fake, vishnu is mentioned in the vedas.

 

hindus today are basing their beliefs off of vedic/vedantic aspect which believes god is one. while the hindus that worship many gods and believe in different gods are basing their belief off of puranic/mythology aspect which was very popular during the gupta era.

 

so hindus today who believe god is one etc... are actually following the older version of hinduism then the puranic hindus.

 

i feel that the puranas were meant to be for morals but people worship the gods in there.

 

i do agree that vaishnavas have made vishnu/krishna very christian like but the bhagavad gita was written before the bible. krishna was a diety who was originally associated with the upanishadic philosophy (bhagavad gita) and later on he became very messiah like when the puranas were written focusing on his childhood, pastimes.

 

many say that jesus is a copy cat of krishna. also there were a lot of other saviour types who had similar characteristics as jesus etc....

 

 

krishna and jesus are not the same though, there lives are very different from each other except for some similarities. jesus never came to india ether.there is no proof for this what so ever. there is not even any evidence that he existed according to many. plus krishna is mentioned in ancient writings that date back to 4bc before any supposed jesus which concludes that the two cannot be the same.

 

just because vishnu is acciated with savior type qualities should not make vishnu fake. vishnu/krishna like i said were originally associated with upanishadic philosophy which sees them as infinite and formless. the idea of vishnu incarnating was meant to show how the formless comes to form to put human biengs into the right path but during the gupta era many many puranas were written which focus of human aspect of vishnu/krishna which is more of what hindus today follow then the philosophy.

 

this is why vaishnavas are more fussy then shaivas because shaivas are closer to the original upanishadic philosophy ( but they also follow some puranas like shiva puranas) and vaishnavas today focus heavily on puranas (not so much upanishads), and half of these puranas claim vishnu is supreme and this and that. if they had followed the upanishads then they would understand that vishnu/shiva are one but because vaishnavas follow the puranas, whic claim vishnu is supreme they don't understand the oness of the two.

 

and there is actually archeological evidence of vishnu, recently found ancient idols of vishnu in russia, but he was definitely not originally russian diety because the phenotype of the statues are not caucasian in any sense. so this probably means that there was some contact between hindus and russians. there are also vishnu idols found in cambodia etc... too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

just because vishnu is acciated with savior type qualities should not make vishnu fake. vishnu/krishna like i said were originally associated with upanishadic philosophy which sees them as infinite and formless. the idea of vishnu incarnating was meant to show how the formless comes to form to put human biengs into the right path but during the gupta era many many puranas were written which focus of human aspect of vishnu/krishna which is more of what hindus today follow then the philosophy.

 

this is why vaishnavas are more fussy then shaivas because shaivas are closer to the original upanishadic philosophy ( but they also follow some puranas like shiva puranas) and vaishnavas today focus heavily on puranas (not so much upanishads), and half of these puranas claim vishnu is supreme and this and that. if they had followed the upanishads then they would understand that vishnu/shiva are one but because vaishnavas follow the puranas, whic claim vishnu is supreme they don't understand the oness of the two.

 

Nice Comment bandhu !:)

Namah Shivaya!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Few Vaishnavas realize that Krishna is the equivalent to Shiva of Shaivism and that Radha is equivalent to Devi of Shaktism. Krishna is Brahman and Radha is Shakti; both are equal and are two aspects of the Divine. The Vaishnava knows this, but unfortunately the Vaishnava associated the Supreme Lord Krishna as the equal with Vishnu. In reality, it's more like:

 

Bhagavan Krishna

 

 

Radharani

Devi

Durga

Kali

etc.

 

Brahma

Vishnu

Matsya

Kurma

Varaha

etc.

Shiva

Krishna (Brahman) incarnates as the Trimurti Who in turn incarnate as Matsya, etc.

 

Radha (Shakti) incarnates as Devi Who in turn incarnates as Durga Maa, Dasmahavidyas, etc.

 

This is why Vaishnavism IS Shaivism and the two ARE Shaktism. It is because the 3 sects are just one, but they give different names to Brahman-Shakti, the Supreme Divine. Unfortunately, only the Smartas realize this and so we have blatent sectarianism between Vaishnavas and Shaivas that manifest themselves in the various denominations of the two religions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Few Vaishnavas realize that Krishna is the equivalent to Shiva of Shaivism and that Radha is equivalent to Devi of Shaktism. Krishna is Brahman and Radha is Shakti; both are equal and are two aspects of the Divine. The Vaishnava knows this, but unfortunately the Vaishnava associated the Supreme Lord Krishna as the equal with Vishnu. In reality, it's more like:

 

Bhagavan Krishna

 

 

Radharani

Devi

Durga

Kali

etc.

 

Brahma

Vishnu

Matsya

Kurma

Varaha

etc.

Shiva

Krishna (Brahman) incarnates as the Trimurti Who in turn incarnate as Matsya, etc.

 

Radha (Shakti) incarnates as Devi Who in turn incarnates as Durga Maa, Dasmahavidyas, etc.

 

This is why Vaishnavism IS Shaivism and the two ARE Shaktism. It is because the 3 sects are just one, but they give different names to Brahman-Shakti, the Supreme Divine. Unfortunately, only the Smartas realize this and so we have blatent sectarianism between Vaishnavas and Shaivas that manifest themselves in the various denominations of the two religions.

 

Can we have some Vedic interpretations (of this realization) of "Radha"? Not the Gaudiya interpretation of Radha.

On the other hand I feel, that a lot of Vaishnava shcools are not really based on realizations as in yoga and tantra but more in Vedantic philosophy.

The realization is focused more on staunch belief in the particular line of philosophy that the sadhak is following, rather than the resulting realization from

austerity and practice of such a philosophy. I'm don't mean to say here that the vaishnavas don't have realization. Just most sampradayik preachings focus

more on Vedantic understanding.

 

In the list of God positioning posted above 'Krsna' to 'Shiva' on top in most Shaiva philosophies and understanding, where Krsna appears in dwapara yuga as an avatara. And as per Shaiva scriptures Shiva manifests himself into Brahma Vishnu and Mahesh working through his various potencies and shakti Devi.

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Can we have some Vedic interpretations (of this realization) of "Radha"? Not the Gaudiya interpretation of Radha.

On the other hand I feel, that a lot of Vaishnava shcools are not really based on realizations as in yoga and tantra but more in Vedantic philosophy.

The realization is focused more on staunch belief in the particular line of philosophy that the sadhak is following, rather than the resulting realization from

austerity and practice of such a philosophy. I'm don't mean to say here that the vaishnavas don't have realization. Just most sampradayik preachings focus

more on Vedantic understanding.

 

do you think so? i think vaishnavas focus heavily on puranas- vishnu and bahagavat purana etc...not as much on vedantic philosophy, if not hardly it all.

 

vedantic philosophy it is also based on realization and yoga dont you agree?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...