Guest guest Posted October 6, 2008 Report Share Posted October 6, 2008 Shivaism and Vishnuism as they appear in modern India differ in various ways but most importantly in one principal area: Vishnuites worship Lord Vishnu as Supreme Lord and Shivaites worship Lord Shiva as Supreme Lord. There are some Shivaite sects who recognize Lord Vishnu's superior position but it is not the case of Vaishnavites. They call Lord Shiva Jagadisha (Lord of the Universe), whereas Vaisnavas Lord Vishnu as He is the True Lord of the Universe. This attitude of the Vaishnavities is highly offensive to Lord shivaites, Followers of Iskcon have gone one step forward by making vague comments on Shiva, Ganesha and other Hindus Gods. You accept that Shiva is the greatest devotee of Vishnu (Parama Bhagavata Uttama). You quote the scripture also in this context (Vaishnavanaam Yatha Sambhuh). In such case, a follower of Vishnu who insults Lord Shiva must be ashamed, since he is contradicting the very philosophy of the original preacher of his own Vaishnava cult. The scriptures also say that Krishna worshiped Lord Shiva and also Narayana worshiped Lord Shiva on the mountain of Meru. The scripture also says that Lord Vishnu became Mohini and became the wife of Lord Shiva and gave birth to Sashta. Therefore, it is foolish to fight with each other without understanding the preachers and the various forms of the same God. Narayana means the source of divine knowledge. This word indicates only Parabrahman. The knowledge is not the inherent sign of the unimaginable God (Parabrahman). God is only the source or basis for the knowledge. This is indicated by the word Narayana. Shiva means auspicious without any second impurity. God being the absolute truth is one without second and therefore, becomes the purest entity. Purity is the auspicious quality (Shiva). The Veda also says that Shiva is one without second (Advaitah Shivah). Rudra means the God, who punishes the sinners and make them weep (Rodayati iti Rudrah). If you recognize the concept of unimaginable God and the energetic forms as media, you will be clear. I appreciate you for having come to the height of the human incarnation (Manusheem Tanum Asritam - Gita). You will come to the final point of the divine knowledge, if you accept the existence of human incarnation in every generation by following the same Gita. A year back when I was on a trip to Bangalore, i made a visit to an Iskcon Temple in Bangalore (Mind you their are two temples divided on two different vaishnava Ideology). However, i made a visit to a visit to smaller temple known as Puri Jaganath temple in an interior locality. I came across a group of women discussing greatness about vaishnavism, Krishna bhakti etc., Seated at a corner, one middle aged women approached me and introduced herself as Shamabhavi. She inquired about me and I introduced myself and told her that I am on a visit to India and am learning about the Greatnes of both Vaishnavism and Shavism. Without giving time any room she started her discourses from Bhagavad Gita, Srimad Bhagavtham. She kept on talking about Vaishnavism and at the regular intervals spitting venom on Shaivism. Inspite my disinterest in her subject, she kept pouncing with her over sub-dued knowledge, she did not have mercy on me and kept speaking. I was so upset with the way she kept making derogatory remarks on Lord Shiva and his consort Goddess Shakti, Even other Gods like Muruga, Ganeshji were not spared. It was indeed offensive on her part to insult Shiva and her followers by stating that they are followers of Maya who will never attain liberation. When I lost my patience, i interrogated her like, like what authority does she possess or Iskcon have to blasphemy other gods? She felt perplexed, and subsequently, she kept saying that Krishna is Supreme and others are Demi-gods and we should not pray. It did not stop her their. She quoted from a Iskcon Text " that all followers of Iskcon were natural Brahmins and are sure to attain liberation on the judgement day " . However when I put the same question in an affivermative manner about Shaivties, she remarked " They cannot attain liberation " . Despite hearing all nonesense from that middle aged lady who already claims that Vaishnava Heavens are at Doorstep, i could only feel pity on her ignorance and arrogance what in sanskrit is known as Aaankhar. I was no mood to argue with that lady very soon we exchanged greetings and our contact numbers, I left the place. However if someone wishes to give that lady some lessons of Both vaishnavism and Shaivaism, you may contact her on 0091 80 23369779, her name is . Shamabhavi. That was the only number she has provided me at that time In this spiritual ladder, the Iskcon is a conservative Hinduism. They believe only one past human incarnation like conservative Christians who believe Jesus only. In this stage the development of their aspects shall be done by generalizing the same God in all the past human incarnations through Universal Spirituality (Krishna, Buddha, Jesus etc.,). They should also extend such generalized concept to the present human incarnation also. You can apply the philosophy of Advaita to all the human incarnations instead of all the human beings. Just like the same soul (Pure awareness) exists in all the human beings, similarly the same unimaginable God exists in all the human incarnations. The same concept can be applied to a specified group of energetic forms like Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva etc. Only such divine specific energetic forms are equal since the same unimaginable God exists in all those specified energetic forms. You should not generalize this concept to all the energetic forms like Indra, Vayu etc. Such concept will remove the misunderstanding in the followers of Ramanuja and Madhva who feel that only one energetic form 'Narayana' (Vishnu) is God. I am amazed to see this conservative concept even in the formless aspect of God! The Brahman of Hindus, the Jehovah of Christians and Allah of Muslims are formless. But still they fight with each other even in this formless aspect of God. That means they are differentiating the formless air as Hindu air, Christian air and Muslim air! At least we can excuse the difference in the forms of God, since the external forms differ. Krishna and Jesus differ in the external forms and the unity is only in the internal God. I assuredly tell you that you will not get the final salvation unless you are liberated from this conservative bond. What is the use of liberation from all the bonds except one bond? You are relieved from the ties of several ropes but if one tie of rope still exists, you cannot be declared as the completely liberated soul. You say that Krishna generated Rudra to mislead some devotees in the spiritual path. Krishna is a recent incarnation whereas Rudra exists even before the birth of Krishna. It is said in Bhagavatam that Krishna did penance for Lord Shiva. If you say that Narayana is fixed in Lord Vishnu only as a word of Yoga Rudha, then we can also fix words like Shiva, Ishwara, Maheswara etc., in Lord Rudra as words of Yoga Rudha. In Gita spoken by Lord Krishna, the words like Ishwara and Maheswara exist in the place of God (Ishwara Sarva Bhutanam, Mayinamtu Maheswaram, Karta Bhokta Maheswarah etc.,). This means your Lord Krishna Himself accepted that Lord Rudra is God. In the Veda, the word Eesha is used to mean God in the beginning of Eesavaasya Upanishat. Shankara diverted atheists who were demons to become theists only. He did not mislead any soul from good to bad. God always tries to uplift the souls but does not mislead any soul. But He was constrained by limitations. The standards of atheists cannot be raised suddenly from ground to sky in which case they will go back. In the view of such psychology, Shankara dragged them up to some distance, which is the maximum extent in their case. Above that there is the danger of fatigue. He purposefully told that soul is God so that the atheist is attracted by His native ambition and at least accept the existence of God. You say that such trick of Shankara as misleading the soul! In that case, the mother who gives food to her child by stating that the moon will come down if the child eats the food is also fraud and cheating the child! Shankara and Ramanuja know the spiritual knowledge from beginning to end because both are the incarnations of the same God. Shankara introduced that much part of the truth which alone can maintain the receivers. More than that will end in the total damage. This is not the fault of Shankara. It is the limitation of standards of the then atheists to whom only Shankara had to preach. When Ramanuja came the situation was better. He handled the believers in God. He separated God from the soul. He showed God in the energetic form called as Narayana. He could not introduce the human incarnation (Krishna) because the theists could not digest the human form of God at that time. Up to this everything is correct in view of the then existing standards of the receivers. You say that simple theoretical devotion is sufficient to please God and you quoted a verse from the Gita (Satatam keertayantah...). What about other verses which praise the practical devotion like the sacrifice of work and fruit of work? Even in your verse, you have not understood the meaning of " Yatantascha Drudhavratah " . The word Yatantah means practical effort (Purusha Prayatna). The word Drudhavratah is associated with this word, which means that the practical effort comes only by firm determination. PRAJWAL PRABHU MAURITIUS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 6, 2008 Report Share Posted October 6, 2008 Om Namah Sivaya Namaste, This is a sensitive topic so it is better not to discuss it. This one mantra from Kaivalya Upanishat seals the matter without controversy : sa brahmaa sa shivaH sendraH so.aksharaH paramaH svaraaT . sa eva vishhNuH sa praaNaH sa kaalo.agniH sa chandramaaH (Brahma, Shiv, Indra, Om, Vishnu, Prana, Kaal, Agni, Chandrama etc are all one - the absolute/OM/infinity). Secondly, there can be only one infinity. regards, Shailendra Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 6, 2008 Report Share Posted October 6, 2008 In my view Lord Shiva and Lord Vishnu are 2 sides of the same coin. God is one, we humans can call in different names. It is not worthwhile to engage in any arguments on this issue. Let Hindus unite and not waste time and energy in unnecessary arguments. Om Shant, Shanti, Shanti From: bhatnagar_shailendraDate: Mon, 6 Oct 2008 15:27:48 +0000 Re: Why Vaishnavites insult Shaivtes Om Namah SivayaNamaste, This is a sensitive topic so it is better not to discuss it. This one mantra from Kaivalya Upanishat seals the matter without controversy : sa brahmaa sa shivaH sendraH so.aksharaH paramaH svaraaT .sa eva vishhNuH sa praaNaH sa kaalo.agniH sa chandramaaH (Brahma, Shiv, Indra, Om, Vishnu, Prana, Kaal, Agni, Chandrama etc are all one - the absolute/OM/infinity).Secondly, there can be only one infinity. regards,Shailendra Want to do more with Windows Live? Learn “10 hidden secrets” from Jamie. Learn Now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 7, 2008 Report Share Posted October 7, 2008 There is a lot of misinformation about the beliefs on either side contributing to the superficial tensions...In the mix are: 1. The Purusha Suktam from the Rig Veda 2. The Brahma Sutra of Badrayana (like a commentary on the Purusha Suktam) 3. Adi Shankara and his commentary on the Brahma Sutra 4. Possible MIS-interpretations/extrapolations by the naive on Shankara's commentary - this apparently led to serious intellectual and moral degradation in Shaivite society in the 200 years after Shankara 5. Ramanujacharya, a Shaivite-turned Vaishnavite who came 200 years after Shankara and his commentary on the Brahma Sutra. The naive among Shaivites claim Ramanuja refuted Shankara...he did no such thing...in fact, he relied very heavily on Shankara's work,; he also went to the FULL original of the Brahma Sutra (not the abridged 4-page version relied on by Shankara and others in his time) and has categorically stated that he provided further clarity on Shankara's work. If people are interested in this topic, I will provide a brief overview later Genghis , mohan dadlani <mohan_dadlani wrote: > > > In my view Lord Shiva and Lord Vishnu are 2 sides of the same coin. > God is one, we humans can call in different names. > It is not worthwhile to engage in any arguments on this issue. Let Hindus unite and not waste time and energy in unnecessary arguments. > Om Shant, Shanti, Shanti > > > > : bhatnagar_shailendra: Mon, 6 Oct 2008 15:27:48 +0000 Re: Why Vaishnavites insult Shaivtes > > > > > Om Namah SivayaNamaste, This is a sensitive topic so it is better not to discuss it. This one mantra from Kaivalya Upanishat seals the matter without controversy : sa brahmaa sa shivaH sendraH so.aksharaH paramaH svaraaT .sa eva vishhNuH sa praaNaH sa kaalo.agniH sa chandramaaH (Brahma, Shiv, Indra, Om, Vishnu, Prana, Kaal, Agni, Chandrama etc are all one - the absolute/OM/infinity).Secondly, there can be only one infinity. regards,Shailendra > > > > > > _______________ > Want to do more with Windows Live? Learn " 10 hidden secrets " from Jamie. > http://windowslive.com/connect/post/jamiethomson.spaces.live.com-Blog-cn\ s!550F681DAD532637!5295.entry?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_domore_092008 > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 7, 2008 Report Share Posted October 7, 2008 Hello Prajwalprabhu My friend there are many ways to reach temple all the ways leads you to the Lord how we reach is not the concern did we reach or not or still trying is the concern. Please read this story hope I try to help you. My friend this coming from a Shiv bhakt makes me sad there are many times Lord Shiva have mention that all the tridev are the same even thinking about in such a way is doing bad Karma. Like the one he did for Shaligram Shila Mallinga Kotibhi Drsthi Yad Phalam Pujiti | Salagrama Sila Yamtu Ekasyam Iva Tad Bhaved || The merit obtained by seeing and worshipping hundreds of thousands of My Lingams, is equivalent to that obtained by worshipping one single salagrama sila. Drstva Pranamita Yena Snapita Pujita Tatha | Yajna Koti Samam Punyam Gavam Koti Phalam Bhavet || Lord Siva spoke to Skanda, any person who has seen Salagram Sila, paid obeisances to Him, bathed and worshipped Him, has achieved the results of performing ten million sacrifices and giving ten million cows in charity. (SKANDA PURANA) In the Skanda Purana Lord Shiva tells Parvati that one who takes the caranamrita of saligram destroys all sinful reactions at their roots, even the killing of a brahmana. Elsewhere the Skanda Purana states that by taking the remnants of foodstuffs offered to saligram, one will get the result of performing many sacrifices. This is story based on Bhavnath Shiv Ling located in Gujarat near the Girnar parvath, how it came into existence Once upon a time in Haven, Indra the King of haven had a opinion that among all the tridev only Lord Vishnu is the only Lord among all as he is the only one who come to rescue all the time for Devatas so as per him Lord Vishnu is the only mighty lord. But to this his Guru that is Guru Brahaspati has a different opinion as per him Brahma is the only true lord as he is his grand father. So both of them try to convince all the devata to believe in what they believe. Indra goes to Vaikunta and ask the Lord Vishnu that he is the only one Load and no one else to this Lord Vishnu smiles at him and says he is not and try to convince him but Indra has already formed his opinion on this. Guru Brahaspati also does the same thing he goes to Lord Brahma but gets the same response. To all this Lord Shiva gets angry and call every one to Kailasha then Lord Shiva ask Indra and Guru Brahaspati to stop what ever they are doing and ask the same question to Lord Vishnu and Lord Brahma as who is the great. To this no both replys that Lord Shiva is the greatest Lord. Lord Shiva then smiles back at them and tell them if Brahma and came to you, you might have said the same thing and if lord Vishnu have came to Brahma he might have said the same thing. Then Lord Shiva tells to both of them that when Indra came to you you should have replied that Lord Brahma is the great Lord among us, them he tell to Lord Brahma that when Guru Brahaspati came to you, you should have told that Lord Vishnu is great and both should have ended the matter then and there instead of prolonging it. Lord Shiva then tells to every one that all the Tridev are the same no one is supreme and all of you have done bad karma of thinking such a bad thing and after that all the Devatas and Lord Brahma and Vishnu agrees to do Tapasya (penance) for the bad Karma they did. So all go to a place and do the Tapasya. In matter of few time Lord Shiva comes to the place where every one is doing the tapasya and give Vardan(wish) to all and all ask the Lord to stay there in the form of Ling so that everyone remembers this and worship him. Lord Has Created many distractions it is us how has to come out of this to see the Lord. OM Nama Shivya , " prajwalprabhu " <prajwalprabhu wrote: > > Shivaism and Vishnuism as they appear in modern India differ in > various ways > but most importantly in one principal area: Vishnuites worship Lord > Vishnu > as Supreme Lord and Shivaites worship Lord Shiva as Supreme Lord. > There are > some Shivaite sects who recognize Lord Vishnu's superior position but > it is not the case of Vaishnavites. They call Lord Shiva Jagadisha > (Lord of the > Universe), whereas Vaisnavas Lord Vishnu as > He is the True Lord of the Universe. > > This attitude of the Vaishnavities is highly offensive to Lord > shivaites, Followers of Iskcon have gone one step forward by making > vague comments on Shiva, Ganesha and other Hindus Gods. You accept > that Shiva is the greatest devotee of Vishnu (Parama Bhagavata > Uttama). You quote the scripture also in this context (Vaishnavanaam > Yatha Sambhuh). In such case, a follower of Vishnu who insults Lord > Shiva must be ashamed, since he is contradicting the very philosophy > of the original preacher of his own Vaishnava cult. The scriptures > also say that Krishna worshiped Lord Shiva and also > Narayana worshiped Lord Shiva on the mountain of Meru. The scripture > also says that Lord Vishnu became Mohini and became the wife of Lord > Shiva and gave birth to Sashta. Therefore, it is foolish to fight > with each other without understanding the preachers and the various > forms of the same God. Narayana means the source of divine > knowledge. This > word indicates only Parabrahman. The knowledge is not the inherent > sign of the unimaginable God (Parabrahman). God is only the source > or basis for the knowledge. This is indicated by the word Narayana. > Shiva means auspicious without any second impurity. God being the > absolute truth is one without second and therefore, becomes the > purest entity. > Purity is the auspicious quality (Shiva). The Veda also says that > Shiva is one without second (Advaitah Shivah). Rudra means the God, > who punishes the sinners and make them weep (Rodayati iti Rudrah). > If you recognize the concept of unimaginable God and the energetic > forms as media, you will be clear. I appreciate you for having come > to the > height of the human incarnation (Manusheem Tanum Asritam - Gita). > You will come to the final point of the divine knowledge, if you > accept the existence of human incarnation in every generation by > following > the same Gita. > > > A year back when I was on a trip to Bangalore, i made a visit to an > Iskcon Temple in Bangalore (Mind you their are two temples divided > on two different vaishnava Ideology). However, i made a visit to a > visit to smaller temple known as Puri Jaganath temple in an interior > locality. I came across a group of women discussing greatness about > vaishnavism, Krishna bhakti etc., Seated at a corner, one middle > aged women approached me and introduced herself as Shamabhavi. She > inquired about me and I introduced myself and told her that I am on > a visit to India and am learning about the Greatnes of both > Vaishnavism and Shavism. Without giving time any room she started > her discourses from Bhagavad Gita, Srimad Bhagavtham. She kept on > talking about Vaishnavism and at the regular intervals spitting > venom on Shaivism. Inspite my disinterest in her subject, she kept > pouncing with her over sub-dued knowledge, she did not have mercy on > me and kept speaking. I was so upset with the way she kept making > derogatory remarks on Lord Shiva and his consort Goddess Shakti, > Even other Gods like Muruga, Ganeshji were not spared. It was > indeed offensive on her part to insult Shiva and her followers by > stating that they are followers of Maya who will never attain > liberation. When I lost my patience, i interrogated her like, like > what authority does she possess or Iskcon have to blasphemy other > gods? She felt perplexed, and subsequently, she kept saying that > Krishna is Supreme and others are Demi-gods and we should not pray. > It did not stop her their. She quoted from a Iskcon Text " that all > followers of Iskcon were natural Brahmins and are sure to attain > liberation on the judgement day " . However when I put the same > question in an affivermative manner about Shaivties, she > remarked " They cannot attain liberation " . > Despite hearing all nonesense from that middle aged lady who already > claims that Vaishnava Heavens are at Doorstep, i could only feel > pity on her ignorance and arrogance what in sanskrit is known as > Aaankhar. I was no mood to argue with that lady very soon we > exchanged greetings and our contact numbers, I left the place. > However if someone wishes to give that lady some lessons of Both > vaishnavism and Shaivaism, you may contact her on 0091 80 23369779, > her name is . Shamabhavi. > > That was the only number she has provided me at that time > > > In this spiritual ladder, the Iskcon is a conservative Hinduism. They > believe only one past human incarnation like conservative Christians > who believe Jesus only. In this stage the development of their > aspects > shall be done by generalizing the same God in all the past human > incarnations through Universal Spirituality (Krishna, Buddha, Jesus > etc.,). They should also extend such generalized concept to the > present human incarnation also. You can apply the philosophy of > Advaita to all the human incarnations instead of all the human > beings. > Just like the same soul (Pure awareness) exists in all the human > beings, similarly the same unimaginable God exists in all the human > incarnations. The same concept can be applied to a specified group of > energetic forms like Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva etc. Only such divine > specific energetic forms are equal since the same unimaginable God > exists in all those specified energetic forms. You should not > generalize this concept to all the energetic forms like Indra, Vayu > etc. Such concept will remove the misunderstanding in the followers > of > Ramanuja and Madhva who feel that only one energetic form > 'Narayana' (Vishnu) is God. I am amazed to see this conservative > concept even in the formless aspect of God! The Brahman of Hindus, > the > Jehovah of Christians and Allah of Muslims are formless. But still > they fight with each other even in this formless aspect of God. That > means they are differentiating the formless air as Hindu air, > Christian air and Muslim air! At least we can excuse the difference > in > the forms of God, since the external forms differ. Krishna and Jesus > differ in the external forms and the unity is only in the internal > God. I assuredly tell you that you will not get the final salvation > unless you are liberated from this conservative bond. What is the use > of liberation from all the bonds except one bond? You are relieved > from the ties of several ropes but if one tie of rope still exists, > you cannot be declared as the completely liberated soul. > > > > You say that Krishna generated Rudra to mislead some devotees in the > spiritual path. Krishna is a recent incarnation whereas Rudra exists > even before the birth of Krishna. It is said in Bhagavatam that > Krishna did penance for Lord Shiva. If you say that Narayana is fixed > in Lord Vishnu only as a word of Yoga Rudha, then we can also fix > words like Shiva, Ishwara, Maheswara etc., in Lord Rudra as words of > Yoga Rudha. In Gita spoken by Lord Krishna, the words like Ishwara > and > Maheswara exist in the place of God (Ishwara Sarva Bhutanam, > Mayinamtu > Maheswaram, Karta Bhokta Maheswarah etc.,). This means your Lord > Krishna Himself accepted that Lord Rudra is God. In the Veda, the > word > Eesha is used to mean God in the beginning of Eesavaasya Upanishat. > > Shankara diverted atheists who were demons to become theists only. He > did not mislead any soul from good to bad. God always tries to uplift > the souls but does not mislead any soul. But He was constrained by > limitations. The standards of atheists cannot be raised suddenly from > ground to sky in which case they will go back. In the view of such > psychology, Shankara dragged them up to some distance, which is the > maximum extent in their case. Above that there is the danger of > fatigue. He purposefully told that soul is God so that the atheist is > attracted by His native ambition and at least accept the existence of > God. You say that such trick of Shankara as misleading the soul! In > that case, the mother who gives food to her child by stating that the > moon will come down if the child eats the food is also fraud and > cheating the child! Shankara and Ramanuja know the spiritual > knowledge > from beginning to end because both are the incarnations of the same > God. Shankara introduced that much part of the truth which alone can > maintain the receivers. More than that will end in the total damage. > This is not the fault of Shankara. It is the limitation of standards > of the then atheists to whom only Shankara had to preach. > > When Ramanuja came the situation was better. He handled the believers > in God. He separated God from the soul. He showed God in the > energetic > form called as Narayana. He could not introduce the human incarnation > (Krishna) because the theists could not digest the human form of God > at that time. Up to this everything is correct in view of the then > existing standards of the receivers. > > > You say that simple theoretical devotion is sufficient to please God > and you quoted a verse from the Gita (Satatam keertayantah...). What > about other verses which praise the practical devotion like the > sacrifice of work and fruit of work? Even in your verse, you have not > understood the meaning of " Yatantascha Drudhavratah " . The word > Yatantah means practical effort (Purusha Prayatna). The word > Drudhavratah is associated with this word, which means that the > practical effort comes only by firm determination. > > > PRAJWAL PRABHU > > MAURITIUS > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 7, 2008 Report Share Posted October 7, 2008 Dear Friends,Please stop this Shivite Visnavite rivalry. This was a ploy by some one to divide we bhaarateeyar. So forget this divisions and join together. UNITY IS STRENGTH. and we need it now more than ever.Thanks.RAHUL <toneyrahulsharma wrote: Hello Prajwalprabhu My friend there are many ways to reach temple all the ways leads you to the Lord how we reach is not the concern did we reach or not or still trying is the concern. Please read this story hope I try to help you. My friend this coming from a Shiv bhakt makes me sad there are many times Lord Shiva have mention that all the tridev are the same even thinking about in such a way is doing bad Karma. Like the one he did for Shaligram Shila Mallinga Kotibhi Drsthi Yad Phalam Pujiti | Salagrama Sila Yamtu Ekasyam Iva Tad Bhaved || The merit obtained by seeing and worshipping hundreds of thousands of My Lingams, is equivalent to that obtained by worshipping one single salagrama sila. Drstva Pranamita Yena Snapita Pujita Tatha | Yajna Koti Samam Punyam Gavam Koti Phalam Bhavet || Lord Siva spoke to Skanda, any person who has seen Salagram Sila, paid obeisances to Him, bathed and worshipped Him, has achieved the results of performing ten million sacrifices and giving ten million cows in charity. (SKANDA PURANA) In the Skanda Purana Lord Shiva tells Parvati that one who takes the caranamrita of saligram destroys all sinful reactions at their roots, even the killing of a brahmana. Elsewhere the Skanda Purana states that by taking the remnants of foodstuffs offered to saligram, one will get the result of performing many sacrifices. This is story based on Bhavnath Shiv Ling located in Gujarat near the Girnar parvath, how it came into existence Once upon a time in Haven, Indra the King of haven had a opinion that among all the tridev only Lord Vishnu is the only Lord among all as he is the only one who come to rescue all the time for Devatas so as per him Lord Vishnu is the only mighty lord. But to this his Guru that is Guru Brahaspati has a different opinion as per him Brahma is the only true lord as he is his grand father. So both of them try to convince all thedevata to believe in what they believe. Indra goes to Vaikunta and ask the Lord Vishnu that he is the only one Load and no one else to this Lord Vishnu smiles at him and says he is not and try to convince him but Indra has already formed his opinion on this. Guru Brahaspati also does the same thing he goes to Lord Brahma but gets the same response. To all this Lord Shiva gets angry and call every one to Kailasha then Lord Shiva ask Indra and Guru Brahaspati to stop what ever they are doing and ask the same question to Lord Vishnu and Lord Brahma as who is the great. To this no both replys that Lord Shiva is the greatest Lord. Lord Shiva then smiles back at them and tell them if Brahma and came to you, you might have said the same thing and if lord Vishnu have came to Brahma he might have said the same thing. Then Lord Shiva tells to both of them that when Indra came to you you should have replied that Lord Brahma is the great Lord among us, them he tell to Lord Brahma that when Guru Brahaspati came to you, you should have told that Lord Vishnu is great and both should have ended the matter then and there instead of prolonging it. Lord Shiva then tells to every one that all the Tridev are the same no one is supreme and all of you have done bad karma of thinking such a bad thing and after that all the Devatas and Lord Brahma and Vishnu agrees to do Tapasya (penance) for the bad Karma they did. So all go to a place and do the Tapasya. In matter of few time Lord Shiva comes to the place where every one is doing the tapasya and give Vardan(wish) to all and all ask the Lord to stay there in the form of Ling so that everyone remembers this and worship him. Lord Has Created many distractions it is us how has to come out of this to see the Lord. OM Nama Shivya --- In , "prajwalprabhu" <prajwalprabhu wrote: > > Shivaism and Vishnuism as they appear in modern India differ in > various ways > but most importantly in one principal area: Vishnuites worship Lord > Vishnu > as Supreme Lord and Shivaites worship Lord Shiva as Supreme Lord. > There are > some Shivaite sects who recognize Lord Vishnu's superior position but > it is not the case of Vaishnavites. They call Lord Shiva Jagadisha > (Lord of the > Universe), whereas Vaisnavas Lord Vishnu as > He is the True Lord of the Universe. > > This attitude of the Vaishnavities is highly offensive to Lord > shivaites, Followers of Iskcon have gone one step forward by making > vague comments on Shiva, Ganesha and other Hindus Gods. You accept > that Shiva is the greatest devotee of Vishnu (Parama Bhagavata > Uttama). You quote the scripture also in this context (Vaishnavanaam > Yatha Sambhuh). In such case, a follower of Vishnu who insults Lord > Shiva must be ashamed, since he is contradicting the very philosophy > of the original preacher of his own Vaishnava cult. The scriptures > also say that Krishna worshiped Lord Shiva and also > Narayana worshiped Lord Shiva on the mountain of Meru. The scripture > also says that Lord Vishnu became Mohini and became the wife of Lord > Shiva and gave birth to Sashta. Therefore, it is foolish to fight > with each other without understanding the preachers and the various > forms of the same God. Narayana means the source of divine > knowledge. This > word indicates only Parabrahman. The knowledge is not the inherent > sign of the unimaginable God (Parabrahman). God is only the source > or basis for the knowledge. This is indicated by the word Narayana. > Shiva means auspicious without any second impurity. God being the > absolute truth is one without second and therefore, becomes the > purest entity. > Purity is the auspicious quality (Shiva). The Veda also says that > Shiva is one without second (Advaitah Shivah). Rudra means the God, > who punishes the sinners and make them weep (Rodayati iti Rudrah). > If you recognize the concept of unimaginable God and the energetic > forms as media, you will be clear. I appreciate you for having come > to the > height of the human incarnation (Manusheem Tanum Asritam - Gita). > You will come to the final point of the divine knowledge, if you > accept the existence of human incarnation in every generation by > following > the same Gita. > > > A year back when I was on a trip to Bangalore, i made a visit to an > Iskcon Temple in Bangalore (Mind you their are two temples divided > on two different vaishnava Ideology). However, i made a visit to a > visit to smaller temple known as Puri Jaganath temple in an interior > locality. I came across a group of women discussing greatness about > vaishnavism, Krishna bhakti etc., Seated at a corner, one middle > aged women approached me and introduced herself as Shamabhavi. She > inquired about me and I introduced myself and told her that I am on > a visit to India and am learning about the Greatnes of both > Vaishnavism and Shavism. Without giving time any room she started > her discourses from Bhagavad Gita, Srimad Bhagavtham. She kept on > talking about Vaishnavism and at the regular intervals spitting > venom on Shaivism. Inspite my disinterest in her subject, she kept > pouncing with her over sub-dued knowledge, she did not have mercy on > me and kept speaking. I was so upset with the way she kept making > derogatory remarks on Lord Shiva and his consort Goddess Shakti, > Even other Gods like Muruga, Ganeshji were not spared. It was > indeed offensive on her part to insult Shiva and her followers by > stating that they are followers of Maya who will never attain > liberation. When I lost my patience, i interrogated her like, like > what authority does she possess or Iskcon have to blasphemy other > gods? She felt perplexed, and subsequently, she kept saying that > Krishna is Supreme and others are Demi-gods and we should not pray. > It did not stop her their. She quoted from a Iskcon Text "that all > followers of Iskcon were natural Brahmins and are sure to attain > liberation on the judgement day". However when I put the same > question in an affivermative manner about Shaivties, she > remarked "They cannot attain liberation ". > Despite hearing all nonesense from that middle aged lady who already > claims that Vaishnava Heavens are at Doorstep, i could only feel > pity on her ignorance and arrogance what in sanskrit is known as > Aaankhar. I was no mood to argue with that lady very soon we > exchanged greetings and our contact numbers, I left the place. > However if someone wishes to give that lady some lessons of Both > vaishnavism and Shaivaism, you may contact her on 0091 80 23369779, > her name is . Shamabhavi. > > That was the only number she has provided me at that time > > > In this spiritual ladder, the Iskcon is a conservative Hinduism. They > believe only one past human incarnation like conservative Christians > who believe Jesus only. In this stage the development of their > aspects > shall be done by generalizing the same God in all the past human > incarnations through Universal Spirituality (Krishna, Buddha, Jesus > etc.,). They should also extend such generalized concept to the > present human incarnation also. You can apply the philosophy of > Advaita to all the human incarnations instead of all the human > beings. > Just like the same soul (Pure awareness) exists in all the human > beings, similarly the same unimaginable God exists in all the human > incarnations. The same concept can be applied to a specified group of > energetic forms like Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva etc. Only such divine > specific energetic forms are equal since the same unimaginable God > exists in all those specified energetic forms. You should not > generalize this concept to all the energetic forms like Indra, Vayu > etc. Such concept will remove the misunderstanding in the followers > of > Ramanuja and Madhva who feel that only one energetic form > 'Narayana' (Vishnu) is God. I am amazed to see this conservative > concept even in the formless aspect of God! The Brahman of Hindus, > the > Jehovah of Christians and Allah of Muslims are formless. But still > they fight with each other even in this formless aspect of God. That > means they are differentiating the formless air as Hindu air, > Christian air and Muslim air! At least we can excuse the difference > in > the forms of God, since the external forms differ. Krishna and Jesus > differ in the external forms and the unity is only in the internal > God. I assuredly tell you that you will not get the final salvation > unless you are liberated from this conservative bond. What is the use > of liberation from all the bonds except one bond? You are relieved > from the ties of several ropes but if one tie of rope still exists, > you cannot be declared as the completely liberated soul. > > > > You say that Krishna generated Rudra to mislead some devotees in the > spiritual path. Krishna is a recent incarnation whereas Rudra exists > even before the birth of Krishna. It is said in Bhagavatam that > Krishna did penance for Lord Shiva. If you say that Narayana is fixed > in Lord Vishnu only as a word of Yoga Rudha, then we can also fix > words like Shiva, Ishwara, Maheswara etc., in Lord Rudra as words of > Yoga Rudha. In Gita spoken by Lord Krishna, the words like Ishwara > and > Maheswara exist in the place of God (Ishwara Sarva Bhutanam, > Mayinamtu > Maheswaram, Karta Bhokta Maheswarah etc.,). This means your Lord > Krishna Himself accepted that Lord Rudra is God. In the Veda, the > word > Eesha is used to mean God in the beginning of Eesavaasya Upanishat. > > Shankara diverted atheists who were demons to become theists only. He > did not mislead any soul from good to bad. God always tries to uplift > the souls but does not mislead any soul. But He was constrained by > limitations. The standards of atheists cannot be raised suddenly from > ground to sky in which case they will go back. In the view of such > psychology, Shankara dragged them up to some distance, which is the > maximum extent in their case. Above that there is the danger of > fatigue. He purposefully told that soul is God so that the atheist is > attracted by His native ambition and at least accept the existence of > God. You say that such trick of Shankara as misleading the soul! In > that case, the mother who gives food to her child by stating that the > moon will come down if the child eats the food is also fraud and > cheating the child! Shankara and Ramanuja know the spiritual > knowledge > from beginning to end because both are the incarnations of the same > God. Shankara introduced that much part of the truth which alone can > maintain the receivers. More than that will end in the total damage. > This is not the fault of Shankara. It is the limitation of standards > of the then atheists to whom only Shankara had to preach. > > When Ramanuja came the situation was better. He handled the believers > in God. He separated God from the soul. He showed God in the > energetic > form called as Narayana. He could not introduce the human incarnation > (Krishna) because the theists could not digest the human form of God > at that time. Up to this everything is correct in view of the then > existing standards of the receivers. > > > You say that simple theoretical devotion is sufficient to please God > and you quoted a verse from the Gita (Satatam keertayantah...). What > about other verses which praise the practical devotion like the > sacrifice of work and fruit of work? Even in your verse, you have not > understood the meaning of "Yatantascha Drudhavratah". The word > Yatantah means practical effort (Purusha Prayatna). The word > Drudhavratah is associated with this word, which means that the > practical effort comes only by firm determination. > > > PRAJWAL PRABHU > > MAURITIUS > Sincerely, Udayabhanu Panickar aum namahh Shivaaya The vow not to kill is great indeed, and greater still is non-eating of the flesh; There would be no butcher if there is non to eat, In eating thus abides the cruder ill, as he is the reason for the killing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 8, 2008 Report Share Posted October 8, 2008 Hello Please read what i have written below before start making ASSUMPTIONS and COMMENTS…. Thanks Rahul , Udayabhanu Panickar <udhayabhanupanickar wrote: > > Dear Friends, > > Please stop this Shivite Visnavite rivalry. This was a ploy by some one to divide we bhaarateeyar. So forget this divisions and join together. UNITY IS STRENGTH. and we need it now more than ever. > > Thanks. > > > > RAHUL <toneyrahulsharma wrote: Hello Prajwalprabhu > > My friend there are many ways to reach temple all the ways leads > you to the Lord how we reach is not the concern did we reach or not > or still trying is the concern. Please read this story hope I try to > help you. My friend this coming from a Shiv bhakt makes me sad there > are many times Lord Shiva have mention that all the tridev are the > same even thinking about in such a way is doing bad Karma. Like the > one he did for Shaligram Shila > > Mallinga Kotibhi Drsthi Yad Phalam Pujiti | > Salagrama Sila Yamtu Ekasyam Iva Tad Bhaved || > > The merit obtained by seeing and worshipping hundreds of thousands > of My Lingams, is equivalent to that obtained by worshipping one > single salagrama sila. > > Drstva Pranamita Yena Snapita Pujita Tatha | > Yajna Koti Samam Punyam Gavam Koti Phalam Bhavet || > > Lord Siva spoke to Skanda, any person who has seen Salagram Sila, > paid obeisances to Him, bathed and worshipped Him, has achieved the > results of performing ten million sacrifices and giving ten million > cows in charity. (SKANDA PURANA) > > In the Skanda Purana Lord Shiva tells Parvati that one who takes the > caranamrita of saligram destroys all sinful reactions at their > roots, even the killing of a brahmana. Elsewhere the Skanda Purana > states that by taking the remnants of foodstuffs offered to > saligram, one will get the result of performing many sacrifices. > > This is story based on Bhavnath Shiv Ling located in Gujarat > near the Girnar parvath, how it came into existence > > > > Once upon a time in Haven, Indra the King of haven had a > opinion that among all the tridev only Lord Vishnu is the only Lord > among all as he is the only one who come to rescue all the time for > Devatas so as per him Lord Vishnu is the only mighty lord. But to > this his Guru that is Guru Brahaspati has a different opinion as per > him Brahma is the only true lord as he is his grand father. So both > of them try to convince all the devata to believe in what they > believe. Indra goes to Vaikunta and ask the Lord Vishnu that he is > the only one Load and no one else to this Lord Vishnu smiles at him > and says he is not and try to convince him but Indra has already > formed his opinion on this. Guru Brahaspati also does the same thing > he goes to Lord Brahma but gets the same response. > > To all this Lord Shiva gets angry and call every one to > Kailasha then Lord Shiva ask Indra and Guru Brahaspati to stop what > ever they are doing and ask the same question to Lord Vishnu and > Lord Brahma as who is the great. To this no both replys that Lord > Shiva is the greatest Lord. Lord Shiva then smiles back at them and > tell them if Brahma and came to you, you might have said the same > thing and if lord Vishnu have came to Brahma he might have said the > same thing. > > Then Lord Shiva tells to both of them that when Indra came to > you you should have replied that Lord Brahma is the great Lord among > us, them he tell to Lord Brahma that when Guru Brahaspati came to > you, you should have told that Lord Vishnu is great and both should > have ended the matter then and there instead of prolonging it. > > Lord Shiva then tells to every one that all the Tridev are the > same no one is supreme and all of you have done bad karma of > thinking such a bad thing and after that all the Devatas and Lord > Brahma and Vishnu agrees to do Tapasya (penance) for the bad Karma > they did. So all go to a place and do the Tapasya. > > In matter of few time Lord Shiva comes to the place where every > one is doing the tapasya and give Vardan(wish) to all and all ask > the Lord to stay there in the form of Ling so that everyone > remembers this and worship him. > > Lord Has Created many distractions it is us how has to come > out of this to see the Lord. > > OM Nama Shivya > > , " prajwalprabhu " > <prajwalprabhu@> wrote: > > > > Shivaism and Vishnuism as they appear in modern India differ in > > various ways > > but most importantly in one principal area: Vishnuites worship > Lord > > Vishnu > > as Supreme Lord and Shivaites worship Lord Shiva as Supreme Lord. > > There are > > some Shivaite sects who recognize Lord Vishnu's superior position > but > > it is not the case of Vaishnavites. They call Lord Shiva Jagadisha > > (Lord of the > > Universe), whereas Vaisnavas Lord Vishnu as > > He is the True Lord of the Universe. > > > > This attitude of the Vaishnavities is highly offensive to Lord > > shivaites, Followers of Iskcon have gone one step forward by > making > > vague comments on Shiva, Ganesha and other Hindus Gods. You accept > > that Shiva is the greatest devotee of Vishnu (Parama Bhagavata > > Uttama). You quote the scripture also in this context > (Vaishnavanaam > > Yatha Sambhuh). In such case, a follower of Vishnu who insults > Lord > > Shiva must be ashamed, since he is contradicting the very > philosophy > > of the original preacher of his own Vaishnava cult. The scriptures > > also say that Krishna worshiped Lord Shiva and also > > Narayana worshiped Lord Shiva on the mountain of Meru. The > scripture > > also says that Lord Vishnu became Mohini and became the wife of > Lord > > Shiva and gave birth to Sashta. Therefore, it is foolish to fight > > with each other without understanding the preachers and the > various > > forms of the same God. Narayana means the source of divine > > knowledge. This > > word indicates only Parabrahman. The knowledge is not the inherent > > sign of the unimaginable God (Parabrahman). God is only the source > > or basis for the knowledge. This is indicated by the word > Narayana. > > Shiva means auspicious without any second impurity. God being the > > absolute truth is one without second and therefore, becomes the > > purest entity. > > Purity is the auspicious quality (Shiva). The Veda also says that > > Shiva is one without second (Advaitah Shivah). Rudra means the > God, > > who punishes the sinners and make them weep (Rodayati iti Rudrah). > > If you recognize the concept of unimaginable God and the energetic > > forms as media, you will be clear. I appreciate you for having > come > > to the > > height of the human incarnation (Manusheem Tanum Asritam - Gita). > > You will come to the final point of the divine knowledge, if you > > accept the existence of human incarnation in every generation by > > following > > the same Gita. > > > > > > A year back when I was on a trip to Bangalore, i made a visit to > an > > Iskcon Temple in Bangalore (Mind you their are two temples divided > > on two different vaishnava Ideology). However, i made a visit to a > > visit to smaller temple known as Puri Jaganath temple in an > interior > > locality. I came across a group of women discussing greatness > about > > vaishnavism, Krishna bhakti etc., Seated at a corner, one middle > > aged women approached me and introduced herself as Shamabhavi. She > > inquired about me and I introduced myself and told her that I am > on > > a visit to India and am learning about the Greatnes of both > > Vaishnavism and Shavism. Without giving time any room she started > > her discourses from Bhagavad Gita, Srimad Bhagavtham. She kept on > > talking about Vaishnavism and at the regular intervals spitting > > venom on Shaivism. Inspite my disinterest in her subject, she > kept > > pouncing with her over sub-dued knowledge, she did not have mercy > on > > me and kept speaking. I was so upset with the way she kept making > > derogatory remarks on Lord Shiva and his consort Goddess Shakti, > > Even other Gods like Muruga, Ganeshji were not spared. It was > > indeed offensive on her part to insult Shiva and her followers by > > stating that they are followers of Maya who will never attain > > liberation. When I lost my patience, i interrogated her like, > like > > what authority does she possess or Iskcon have to blasphemy other > > gods? She felt perplexed, and subsequently, she kept saying that > > Krishna is Supreme and others are Demi-gods and we should not > pray. > > It did not stop her their. She quoted from a Iskcon Text " that all > > followers of Iskcon were natural Brahmins and are sure to attain > > liberation on the judgement day " . However when I put the same > > question in an affivermative manner about Shaivties, she > > remarked " They cannot attain liberation " . > > Despite hearing all nonesense from that middle aged lady who > already > > claims that Vaishnava Heavens are at Doorstep, i could only feel > > pity on her ignorance and arrogance what in sanskrit is known as > > Aaankhar. I was no mood to argue with that lady very soon we > > exchanged greetings and our contact numbers, I left the place. > > However if someone wishes to give that lady some lessons of Both > > vaishnavism and Shaivaism, you may contact her on 0091 80 > 23369779, > > her name is . Shamabhavi. > > > > That was the only number she has provided me at that time > > > > > > In this spiritual ladder, the Iskcon is a conservative Hinduism. > They > > believe only one past human incarnation like conservative > Christians > > who believe Jesus only. In this stage the development of their > > aspects > > shall be done by generalizing the same God in all the past human > > incarnations through Universal Spirituality (Krishna, Buddha, Jesus > > etc.,). They should also extend such generalized concept to the > > present human incarnation also. You can apply the philosophy of > > Advaita to all the human incarnations instead of all the human > > beings. > > Just like the same soul (Pure awareness) exists in all the human > > beings, similarly the same unimaginable God exists in all the human > > incarnations. The same concept can be applied to a specified group > of > > energetic forms like Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva etc. Only such divine > > specific energetic forms are equal since the same unimaginable God > > exists in all those specified energetic forms. You should not > > generalize this concept to all the energetic forms like Indra, Vayu > > etc. Such concept will remove the misunderstanding in the > followers > > of > > Ramanuja and Madhva who feel that only one energetic form > > 'Narayana' (Vishnu) is God. I am amazed to see this conservative > > concept even in the formless aspect of God! The Brahman of Hindus, > > the > > Jehovah of Christians and Allah of Muslims are formless. But still > > they fight with each other even in this formless aspect of God. > That > > means they are differentiating the formless air as Hindu air, > > Christian air and Muslim air! At least we can excuse the > difference > > in > > the forms of God, since the external forms differ. Krishna and > Jesus > > differ in the external forms and the unity is only in the internal > > God. I assuredly tell you that you will not get the final salvation > > unless you are liberated from this conservative bond. What is the > use > > of liberation from all the bonds except one bond? You are relieved > > from the ties of several ropes but if one tie of rope still exists, > > you cannot be declared as the completely liberated soul. > > > > > > > > You say that Krishna generated Rudra to mislead some devotees in > the > > spiritual path. Krishna is a recent incarnation whereas Rudra > exists > > even before the birth of Krishna. It is said in Bhagavatam that > > Krishna did penance for Lord Shiva. If you say that Narayana is > fixed > > in Lord Vishnu only as a word of Yoga Rudha, then we can also fix > > words like Shiva, Ishwara, Maheswara etc., in Lord Rudra as words > of > > Yoga Rudha. In Gita spoken by Lord Krishna, the words like Ishwara > > and > > Maheswara exist in the place of God (Ishwara Sarva Bhutanam, > > Mayinamtu > > Maheswaram, Karta Bhokta Maheswarah etc.,). This means your Lord > > Krishna Himself accepted that Lord Rudra is God. In the Veda, the > > word > > Eesha is used to mean God in the beginning of Eesavaasya Upanishat. > > > > Shankara diverted atheists who were demons to become theists only. > He > > did not mislead any soul from good to bad. God always tries to > uplift > > the souls but does not mislead any soul. But He was constrained by > > limitations. The standards of atheists cannot be raised suddenly > from > > ground to sky in which case they will go back. In the view of such > > psychology, Shankara dragged them up to some distance, which is the > > maximum extent in their case. Above that there is the danger of > > fatigue. He purposefully told that soul is God so that the atheist > is > > attracted by His native ambition and at least accept the existence > of > > God. You say that such trick of Shankara as misleading the soul! In > > that case, the mother who gives food to her child by stating that > the > > moon will come down if the child eats the food is also fraud and > > cheating the child! Shankara and Ramanuja know the spiritual > > knowledge > > from beginning to end because both are the incarnations of the same > > God. Shankara introduced that much part of the truth which alone > can > > maintain the receivers. More than that will end in the total > damage. > > This is not the fault of Shankara. It is the limitation of > standards > > of the then atheists to whom only Shankara had to preach. > > > > When Ramanuja came the situation was better. He handled the > believers > > in God. He separated God from the soul. He showed God in the > > energetic > > form called as Narayana. He could not introduce the human > incarnation > > (Krishna) because the theists could not digest the human form of > God > > at that time. Up to this everything is correct in view of the then > > existing standards of the receivers. > > > > > > You say that simple theoretical devotion is sufficient to please > God > > and you quoted a verse from the Gita (Satatam keertayantah...). > What > > about other verses which praise the practical devotion like the > > sacrifice of work and fruit of work? Even in your verse, you have > not > > understood the meaning of " Yatantascha Drudhavratah " . The word > > Yatantah means practical effort (Purusha Prayatna). The word > > Drudhavratah is associated with this word, which means that the > > practical effort comes only by firm determination. > > > > > > PRAJWAL PRABHU > > > > MAURITIUS > > Sincerely, > > Udayabhanu Panickar > aum namahh Shivaaya > The vow not to kill is great indeed, and greater still is non- eating of the flesh; There would be no butcher if there is non to eat, In eating thus abides the cruder ill, as he is the reason for the killing. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 8, 2008 Report Share Posted October 8, 2008 Dear Vijji Bajji, You are totally wrong and misinformed.Who told you that Ramanuja was a Sivaite and Adi Sankara was a Saivite.Ramanuja's first Guru was Yadavaprakasa who was a BedaABeda Acharya and who was a exponent of Advaita who was also a Vaishnavite.Later on Ramanuja became the follower of Alavandar who was a Great Scholar of Sri Vaishnavism.Ramanuja was always a Vaishnava.The only change in his life was that he was a mere Vaishnava by birth who later on converted to Srivaishnavism after becomming the followe of Alavandar.Adi Sankara was also a Vaishnava.The only difference being that in their philosophy. The philosophy of Naadamuni was Visishtaadvaita and that of Gaudapada was Advaita.Gaudapada was the Acharya of Adi Saankara.Even today in Kanchi Sankara \Matam for all official purposes the Samkaraacharya signs only as OM NAMO NAARAAYANAAYA and not Nassivaaya.According to Vedas LORD NAARAAYANA is the Supreme Brahman.And all the Vedantins accept that.According to Vedas there are 11 RUDRAS.And the Naayanmaars combined the 11Rudras as one God and christained that God as Siva.Saivism originated only after the advent of Naayanmaars and there was no God called Siva before the Naayanmaars there was only Rudra.The Lord SANKARA is the first among the 11 Ridras according to Vedas and he is the son of Brahma an d Brahma is the son of PARABRAHMAN LORD NAARAAYANA according to Vedas.The later Advaitins betrayed Adi Sankara and began to follow a new philosophy saying All Gods are one and only their names are different which againszt the original Advaitam established by Adi Sankara.Saivism is against Vedas by claimimg mythical God Siva is the Supreme Brahman a nd not LORD NAARAAYANA.And many of the Saivaites equate Lord Siva with Lord VISHNU and LORD BRAHMA and sayall the 3 are same which is against VEDAS.So, Saivism is a Nastika Religion which does not accept the authority of Vedas.Assuming the current Advaitaacharyas wrong inerpretation of Adi Sankara itszelf as the philosophy of Saivasm and Saakthaism , the Saivaites philosophy is Secularism and their claim that Vaishnavas should follow their Philosophy and ideology does not hold water.Since, Advaitam is not the philosophy of Vaishnavites and Visishtaaddvaitam is the Philosophy of Srivaishnavism.Sorry if I had wounded anyones wrong beliefs in the forumby posting the truths.Vedas are the ultimate.It is the only PRAMAANA. B.C.VENKATAKRISHNAN. website: www.vedascience.com genghis1291 <genghis Re: Why Vaishnavites insult Shaivtes Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2008, 8:46 AM There is a lot of misinformation about the beliefs on either sidecontributing to the superficial tensions...In the mix are:1. The Purusha Suktam from the Rig Veda2. The Brahma Sutra of Badrayana (like a commentary on the PurushaSuktam)3. Adi Shankara and his commentary on the Brahma Sutra4. Possible MIS-interpretations /extrapolations by the naive onShankara's commentary - this apparently led to serious intellectual andmoral degradation in Shaivite society in the 200 years after Shankara5. Ramanujacharya, a Shaivite-turned Vaishnavite who came 200 yearsafter Shankara and his commentary on the Brahma Sutra. The naive amongShaivites claim Ramanuja refuted Shankara...he did no such thing...infact, he relied very heavily on Shankara's work,; he also went to theFULL original of the Brahma Sutra (not the abridged 4-page versionrelied on by Shankara and others in his time) and has categoricallystated that he provided further clarity on Shankara's work.If people are interested in this topic, I will provide a brief overviewlaterGenghisom_namah_shivaya_ group@ s.com, mohan dadlani<mohan_dadlani@ ...> wrote:>>> In my view Lord Shiva and Lord Vishnu are 2 sides of the same coin.> God is one, we humans can call in different names.> It is not worthwhile to engage in any arguments on this issue. LetHindus unite and not waste time and energy in unnecessary arguments.> Om Shant, Shanti, Shanti>>>> om_namah_shivaya_ group : bhatnagar_shailendr a: Mon, 6 Oct2008 15:27:48 +0000[om_namah_shivaya_ group] Re: WhyVaishnavites insult Shaivtes>>>>> Om Namah SivayaNamaste, This is a sensitive topic so it is better notto discuss it. This one mantra from Kaivalya Upanishat seals the matterwithout controversy : sa brahmaa sa shivaH sendraH so.aksharaH paramaHsvaraaT .sa eva vishhNuH sa praaNaH sa kaalo.agniH sa chandramaaH(Brahma, Shiv, Indra, Om, Vishnu, Prana, Kaal, Agni, Chandrama etc areall one - the absolute/OM/ infinity) .Secondly, there can be only oneinfinity. regards,Shailendra>>>>>> ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _> Want to do more with Windows Live? Learn "10 hidden secrets"from Jamie.>http://windowslive. com/connect/ post/jamiethomso n.spaces. live.com- Blog-cn\s!550F681DAD532637! 5295.entry? ocid=TXT_ TAGLM_WL_ domore_092008> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 8, 2008 Report Share Posted October 8, 2008 ....and here we go again. Saivism and Vaishnavism are cults created by people, not gods. People cannot say with any certainty what is going to happen to them tomorrow and here we have people who are trying to assert who is the supreme based on partial understanding of vedas. WELL DONE! venkata krishnan <bcvk71 ; BCVENKATAKRISHNANNewsListgroup <bcvenkatakrishnannewslist >Wednesday, October 8, 2008 6:34:45 AMRe: Re: Why Vaishnavites insult Shaivtes Dear Vijji Bajji, You are totally wrong and misinformed. Who told you that Ramanuja was a Sivaite and Adi Sankara was a Saivite.Ramanuja' s first Guru was Yadavaprakasa who was a BedaABeda Acharya and who was a exponent of Advaita who was also a Vaishnavite. Later on Ramanuja became the follower of Alavandar who was a Great Scholar of Sri Vaishnavism. Ramanuja was always a Vaishnava.The only change in his life was that he was a mere Vaishnava by birth who later on converted to Srivaishnavism after becomming the followe of Alavandar.Adi Sankara was also a Vaishnava.The only difference being that in their philosophy. The philosophy of Naadamuni was Visishtaadvaita and that of Gaudapada was Advaita.Gaudapada was the Acharya of Adi Saankara.Even today in Kanchi Sankara \Matam for all official purposes the Samkaraacharya signs only as OM NAMO NAARAAYANAAYA and not Nassivaaya.Accordin g to Vedas LORD NAARAAYANA is the Supreme Brahman.And all the Vedantins accept that.According to Vedas there are 11 RUDRAS.And the Naayanmaars combined the 11Rudras as one God and christained that God as Siva.Saivism originated only after the advent of Naayanmaars and there was no God called Siva before the Naayanmaars there was only Rudra.The Lord SANKARA is the first among the 11 Ridras according to Vedas and he is the son of Brahma an d Brahma is the son of PARABRAHMAN LORD NAARAAYANA according to Vedas.The later Advaitins betrayed Adi Sankara and began to follow a new philosophy saying All Gods are one and only their names are different which againszt the original Advaitam established by Adi Sankara.Saivism is against Vedas by claimimg mythical God Siva is the Supreme Brahman a nd not LORD NAARAAYANA.And many of the Saivaites equate Lord Siva with Lord VISHNU and LORD BRAHMA and sayall the 3 are same which is against VEDAS.So, Saivism is a Nastika Religion which does not accept the authority of Vedas.Assuming the current Advaitaacharyas wrong inerpretation of Adi Sankara itszelf as the philosophy of Saivasm and Saakthaism , the Saivaites philosophy is Secularism and their claim that Vaishnavas should follow their Philosophy and ideology does not hold water.Since, Advaitam is not the philosophy of Vaishnavites and Visishtaaddvaitam is the Philosophy of Srivaishnavism. Sorry if I had wounded anyones wrong beliefs in the forumby posting the truths.Vedas are the ultimate.It is the only PRAMAANA. B.C.VENKATAKRISHNAN . website: www.vedascience. com genghis1291 <genghis (AT) comcast (DOT) net>[om_namah_shivaya_ group] Re: Why Vaishnavites insult Shaivtesom_namah_shivaya_ group@ s.comTuesday, October 7, 2008, 8:46 AM There is a lot of misinformation about the beliefs on either sidecontributing to the superficial tensions...In the mix are:1. The Purusha Suktam from the Rig Veda2. The Brahma Sutra of Badrayana (like a commentary on the PurushaSuktam)3. Adi Shankara and his commentary on the Brahma Sutra4. Possible MIS-interpretations /extrapolations by the naive onShankara's commentary - this apparently led to serious intellectual andmoral degradation in Shaivite society in the 200 years after Shankara5. Ramanujacharya, a Shaivite-turned Vaishnavite who came 200 yearsafter Shankara and his commentary on the Brahma Sutra. The naive amongShaivites claim Ramanuja refuted Shankara...he did no such thing...infact, he relied very heavily on Shankara's work,; he also went to theFULL original of the Brahma Sutra (not the abridged 4-page versionrelied on by Shankara and others in his time) and has categoricallystated that he provided further clarity on Shankara's work.If people are interested in this topic, I will provide a brief overviewlaterGenghisom_namah_shivaya_ group@ s.com, mohan dadlani<mohan_dadlani@ ...> wrote:>>> In my view Lord Shiva and Lord Vishnu are 2 sides of the same coin.> God is one, we humans can call in different names.> It is not worthwhile to engage in any arguments on this issue. LetHindus unite and not waste time and energy in unnecessary arguments.> Om Shant, Shanti, Shanti>>>> om_namah_shivaya_ group : bhatnagar_shailendr a: Mon, 6 Oct2008 15:27:48 +0000[om_namah_shivaya_ group] Re: WhyVaishnavites insult Shaivtes>>>>> Om Namah SivayaNamaste, This is a sensitive topic so it is better notto discuss it. This one mantra from Kaivalya Upanishat seals the matterwithout controversy : sa brahmaa sa shivaH sendraH so.aksharaH paramaHsvaraaT .sa eva vishhNuH sa praaNaH sa kaalo.agniH sa chandramaaH(Brahma, Shiv, Indra, Om, Vishnu, Prana, Kaal, Agni, Chandrama etc areall one - the absolute/OM/ infinity) .Secondly, there can be only oneinfinity. regards,Shailendra>>>>>> ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _> Want to do more with Windows Live? Learn "10 hidden secrets"from Jamie.>http://windowslive. com/connect/ post/jamiethomso n.spaces. live.com- Blog-cn\s!550F681DAD532637! 5295.entry? ocid=TXT_ TAGLM_WL_ domore_092008> Canada Toolbar : Search from anywhere on the web and bookmark your favourite sites. Download it now! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 8, 2008 Report Share Posted October 8, 2008 Om Namah Sivaya Dear Sri B.C.VENKATAKRISHNAN , For your information: “Panchakshara is a Mahamantra which is composed of five letters, Namassivaya. A Mantra is that which removes all obstacles and miseries of one who reflects on it and bestows eternal bliss and immortality. Panchakshara is the best among seven crores of Mantras. There are seven Skandhas in Yajurveda. There is Rudradhyayi in the centre of the middle Skandha. In this Rudradhyayi there are one thousand Rudra Mantras. Namassivaya or the Siva Panchakshara Mantra shines in the centre of these one thousand Rudra Mantras. Yajurveda is the head of Paramesvara, who is the Veda Purusha. Rudram which is in the middle is the face, Panchakshara is His eye, Siva which is in the centre of the ‘Namassivaya’ is the apple of the eye. He who does Japa of this Panchakshara is freed from births and deaths and attains eternal bliss. This is the emphatic declaration of the Vedas. This Panchakshara is the body of Lord Nataraja. This is the abode of Lord Siva. “ ---Sri Swami Sivananda According to the Great Saivite Saint Appar, there are three aspects of Siva. (1) The lower Siva who dissolves the world and who liberates Jivas from their bondage (Rudra) (2) The higher form is called Parapara. In this form Siva appears as Siva and Sakti (Ardhanarisvara). It has the name Param-Jyoti (Infinate Divine Light / SATCHIDANANDA). Brahma and Vishnu were not able to comprehend this Jyoti. (3) Beyond these two forms is the Param, or the Ultimate Being from whom Brahma, Vishnu, Rudra originate. It is purely the Saiva form. It is Formless. It is the Sivam of the Saiva Siddhanta. It is Para Brahman of the Upanishads and Vedantins. Saint Appar says: "Everything is the manifestation of Lord Siva. Siva is Narayana, Brahma, the four Vedas, the Holiest, the most Ancient, the Perfect. Though Siva is all these, He is none of these. He is without name, without birth, death or disease. He is at once the transcendent and the immanent. " "Of all the scriptures in the world, it is the Vedas alone that declare that even the study of the Vedas is secondary. The real study is that by which we realize the Unchangeable. And that is neither reading, nor believing, nor reasoning, but Superconscious perception, or samadhi." -----Sri Swami Vivekananda Sivaya Namah--- On Wed, 8/10/08, venkata krishnan <bcvk71 wrote: venkata krishnan <bcvk71Re: Re: Why Vaishnavites insult Shaivtes , "BCVENKATAKRISHNANNewsListgroup" <bcvenkatakrishnannewslist >Wednesday, 8 October, 2008, 11:34 AM Dear Vijji Bajji, You are totally wrong and misinformed. Who told you that Ramanuja was a Sivaite and Adi Sankara was a Saivite.Ramanuja' s first Guru was Yadavaprakasa who was a BedaABeda Acharya and who was a exponent of Advaita who was also a Vaishnavite. Later on Ramanuja became the follower of Alavandar who was a Great Scholar of Sri Vaishnavism. Ramanuja was always a Vaishnava.The only change in his life was that he was a mere Vaishnava by birth who later on converted to Srivaishnavism after becomming the followe of Alavandar.Adi Sankara was also a Vaishnava.The only difference being that in their philosophy. The philosophy of Naadamuni was Visishtaadvaita and that of Gaudapada was Advaita.Gaudapada was the Acharya of Adi Saankara.Even today in Kanchi Sankara \Matam for all official purposes the Samkaraacharya signs only as OM NAMO NAARAAYANAAYA and not Nassivaaya.Accordin g to Vedas LORD NAARAAYANA is the Supreme Brahman.And all the Vedantins accept that.According to Vedas there are 11 RUDRAS.And the Naayanmaars combined the 11Rudras as one God and christained that God as Siva.Saivism originated only after the advent of Naayanmaars and there was no God called Siva before the Naayanmaars there was only Rudra.The Lord SANKARA is the first among the 11 Ridras according to Vedas and he is the son of Brahma an d Brahma is the son of PARABRAHMAN LORD NAARAAYANA according to Vedas.The later Advaitins betrayed Adi Sankara and began to follow a new philosophy saying All Gods are one and only their names are different which againszt the original Advaitam established by Adi Sankara.Saivism is against Vedas by claimimg mythical God Siva is the Supreme Brahman a nd not LORD NAARAAYANA.And many of the Saivaites equate Lord Siva with Lord VISHNU and LORD BRAHMA and sayall the 3 are same which is against VEDAS.So, Saivism is a Nastika Religion which does not accept the authority of Vedas.Assuming the current Advaitaacharyas wrong inerpretation of Adi Sankara itszelf as the philosophy of Saivasm and Saakthaism , the Saivaites philosophy is Secularism and their claim that Vaishnavas should follow their Philosophy and ideology does not hold water.Since, Advaitam is not the philosophy of Vaishnavites and Visishtaaddvaitam is the Philosophy of Srivaishnavism. Sorry if I had wounded anyones wrong beliefs in the forumby posting the truths.Vedas are the ultimate.It is the only PRAMAANA. B.C.VENKATAKRISHNAN . website: www.vedascience. com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 9, 2008 Report Share Posted October 9, 2008 All these misunderstandings occur due to not realizing the Iraivan. Realizing is different from mere knowing that arises out of hearing, reading or contemplation. Man models Iraivan out of his own hands and names him colored by his culture and language. Thereafter he calls the idol the Iraivan. He should go further and realize this Iraivan that was symbolized by him. But this is an important step in his spiritual development. Only if he trods further he will know that which is the nameless One. It is this One who sustains our world. Arguements occur only when one set of humans deem their idol higher than the other. Has the Iraivan itself manifested itself and taken sides? The people out of their own pride thrust their superior beliefs. The attachment to superiority over others is reflected in all realms of human endeavor be it of business, games etc. It is for this reason the Iraivan has created this world with limitations. For whom can we excel if all are of the same capacity and attributes? But man tiring of this game stemmed by anavam thereafter seeks his true self. The outcome of this is the true religion. Realizing is direct experience. Hence 'arivathe ver, unarvathu ver'. (Realizing Iraivan is different from having an idea about Iraivan that it is Shivan, Vishnu, light etc). Without this realization men try to understand the scriptures and symbolizations made by earlier saints who realized the One. Due to not knowing that which is meant, they have interpreted the scriptures, the rituals etc to serve their own selfish means. The feeling of superior Bhakti, that some will go to hell while other won't, that some will get mukthi while others won't, making money, sidelining others etc stems from the anavam. It is that which is the asuran and the demon. It is that which is the great illusion that is manifested by the unwavering Reality. Removing this illusion is the goal. Being under this illusion is proof that we are all children of Iraivan - for being under its Mayai. And finally, what will Iraivan get by permanently barring some from reaching mukthi or heaven? In truth it (the Iraivan) is the innermost support of our soul. Find the moolasthanam within and one shall know this truth. There is no need to go to this heaven or that. There is no mukthi or moksham reaching this or that abode. It is within us now and to all it is available. The jivatma born as man has the opportunity to fetch this. Endless are Iraivan's creation. Infinite are the jivatmas. OM Hari OM Haran Hari and Haran is One and the same only. the end. , " prajwalprabhu " <prajwalprabhu wrote: > > Shivaism and Vishnuism as they appear in modern India differ in > various ways > but most importantly in one principal area: Vishnuites worship Lord > Vishnu > as Supreme Lord and Shivaites worship Lord Shiva as Supreme Lord. > There are > some Shivaite sects who recognize Lord Vishnu's superior position but > it is not the case of Vaishnavites. They call Lord Shiva Jagadisha > (Lord of the > Universe), whereas Vaisnavas Lord Vishnu as > He is the True Lord of the Universe. > > This attitude of the Vaishnavities is highly offensive to Lord > shivaites, Followers of Iskcon have gone one step forward by making > vague comments on Shiva, Ganesha and other Hindus Gods. You accept > that Shiva is the greatest devotee of Vishnu (Parama Bhagavata > Uttama). You quote the scripture also in this context (Vaishnavanaam > Yatha Sambhuh). In such case, a follower of Vishnu who insults Lord > Shiva must be ashamed, since he is contradicting the very philosophy > of the original preacher of his own Vaishnava cult. The scriptures > also say that Krishna worshiped Lord Shiva and also > Narayana worshiped Lord Shiva on the mountain of Meru. The scripture > also says that Lord Vishnu became Mohini and became the wife of Lord > Shiva and gave birth to Sashta. Therefore, it is foolish to fight > with each other without understanding the preachers and the various > forms of the same God. Narayana means the source of divine > knowledge. This > word indicates only Parabrahman. The knowledge is not the inherent > sign of the unimaginable God (Parabrahman). God is only the source > or basis for the knowledge. This is indicated by the word Narayana. > Shiva means auspicious without any second impurity. God being the > absolute truth is one without second and therefore, becomes the > purest entity. > Purity is the auspicious quality (Shiva). The Veda also says that > Shiva is one without second (Advaitah Shivah). Rudra means the God, > who punishes the sinners and make them weep (Rodayati iti Rudrah). > If you recognize the concept of unimaginable God and the energetic > forms as media, you will be clear. I appreciate you for having come > to the > height of the human incarnation (Manusheem Tanum Asritam - Gita). > You will come to the final point of the divine knowledge, if you > accept the existence of human incarnation in every generation by > following > the same Gita. > > > A year back when I was on a trip to Bangalore, i made a visit to an > Iskcon Temple in Bangalore (Mind you their are two temples divided > on two different vaishnava Ideology). However, i made a visit to a > visit to smaller temple known as Puri Jaganath temple in an interior > locality. I came across a group of women discussing greatness about > vaishnavism, Krishna bhakti etc., Seated at a corner, one middle > aged women approached me and introduced herself as Shamabhavi. She > inquired about me and I introduced myself and told her that I am on > a visit to India and am learning about the Greatnes of both > Vaishnavism and Shavism. Without giving time any room she started > her discourses from Bhagavad Gita, Srimad Bhagavtham. She kept on > talking about Vaishnavism and at the regular intervals spitting > venom on Shaivism. Inspite my disinterest in her subject, she kept > pouncing with her over sub-dued knowledge, she did not have mercy on > me and kept speaking. I was so upset with the way she kept making > derogatory remarks on Lord Shiva and his consort Goddess Shakti, > Even other Gods like Muruga, Ganeshji were not spared. It was > indeed offensive on her part to insult Shiva and her followers by > stating that they are followers of Maya who will never attain > liberation. When I lost my patience, i interrogated her like, like > what authority does she possess or Iskcon have to blasphemy other > gods? She felt perplexed, and subsequently, she kept saying that > Krishna is Supreme and others are Demi-gods and we should not pray. > It did not stop her their. She quoted from a Iskcon Text " that all > followers of Iskcon were natural Brahmins and are sure to attain > liberation on the judgement day " . However when I put the same > question in an affivermative manner about Shaivties, she > remarked " They cannot attain liberation " . > Despite hearing all nonesense from that middle aged lady who already > claims that Vaishnava Heavens are at Doorstep, i could only feel > pity on her ignorance and arrogance what in sanskrit is known as > Aaankhar. I was no mood to argue with that lady very soon we > exchanged greetings and our contact numbers, I left the place. > However if someone wishes to give that lady some lessons of Both > vaishnavism and Shaivaism, you may contact her on 0091 80 23369779, > her name is . Shamabhavi. > > That was the only number she has provided me at that time > > > In this spiritual ladder, the Iskcon is a conservative Hinduism. They > believe only one past human incarnation like conservative Christians > who believe Jesus only. In this stage the development of their > aspects > shall be done by generalizing the same God in all the past human > incarnations through Universal Spirituality (Krishna, Buddha, Jesus > etc.,). They should also extend such generalized concept to the > present human incarnation also. You can apply the philosophy of > Advaita to all the human incarnations instead of all the human > beings. > Just like the same soul (Pure awareness) exists in all the human > beings, similarly the same unimaginable God exists in all the human > incarnations. The same concept can be applied to a specified group of > energetic forms like Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva etc. Only such divine > specific energetic forms are equal since the same unimaginable God > exists in all those specified energetic forms. You should not > generalize this concept to all the energetic forms like Indra, Vayu > etc. Such concept will remove the misunderstanding in the followers > of > Ramanuja and Madhva who feel that only one energetic form > 'Narayana' (Vishnu) is God. I am amazed to see this conservative > concept even in the formless aspect of God! The Brahman of Hindus, > the > Jehovah of Christians and Allah of Muslims are formless. But still > they fight with each other even in this formless aspect of God. That > means they are differentiating the formless air as Hindu air, > Christian air and Muslim air! At least we can excuse the difference > in > the forms of God, since the external forms differ. Krishna and Jesus > differ in the external forms and the unity is only in the internal > God. I assuredly tell you that you will not get the final salvation > unless you are liberated from this conservative bond. What is the use > of liberation from all the bonds except one bond? You are relieved > from the ties of several ropes but if one tie of rope still exists, > you cannot be declared as the completely liberated soul. > > > > You say that Krishna generated Rudra to mislead some devotees in the > spiritual path. Krishna is a recent incarnation whereas Rudra exists > even before the birth of Krishna. It is said in Bhagavatam that > Krishna did penance for Lord Shiva. If you say that Narayana is fixed > in Lord Vishnu only as a word of Yoga Rudha, then we can also fix > words like Shiva, Ishwara, Maheswara etc., in Lord Rudra as words of > Yoga Rudha. In Gita spoken by Lord Krishna, the words like Ishwara > and > Maheswara exist in the place of God (Ishwara Sarva Bhutanam, > Mayinamtu > Maheswaram, Karta Bhokta Maheswarah etc.,). This means your Lord > Krishna Himself accepted that Lord Rudra is God. In the Veda, the > word > Eesha is used to mean God in the beginning of Eesavaasya Upanishat. > > Shankara diverted atheists who were demons to become theists only. He > did not mislead any soul from good to bad. God always tries to uplift > the souls but does not mislead any soul. But He was constrained by > limitations. The standards of atheists cannot be raised suddenly from > ground to sky in which case they will go back. In the view of such > psychology, Shankara dragged them up to some distance, which is the > maximum extent in their case. Above that there is the danger of > fatigue. He purposefully told that soul is God so that the atheist is > attracted by His native ambition and at least accept the existence of > God. You say that such trick of Shankara as misleading the soul! In > that case, the mother who gives food to her child by stating that the > moon will come down if the child eats the food is also fraud and > cheating the child! Shankara and Ramanuja know the spiritual > knowledge > from beginning to end because both are the incarnations of the same > God. Shankara introduced that much part of the truth which alone can > maintain the receivers. More than that will end in the total damage. > This is not the fault of Shankara. It is the limitation of standards > of the then atheists to whom only Shankara had to preach. > > When Ramanuja came the situation was better. He handled the believers > in God. He separated God from the soul. He showed God in the > energetic > form called as Narayana. He could not introduce the human incarnation > (Krishna) because the theists could not digest the human form of God > at that time. Up to this everything is correct in view of the then > existing standards of the receivers. > > > You say that simple theoretical devotion is sufficient to please God > and you quoted a verse from the Gita (Satatam keertayantah...). What > about other verses which praise the practical devotion like the > sacrifice of work and fruit of work? Even in your verse, you have not > understood the meaning of " Yatantascha Drudhavratah " . The word > Yatantah means practical effort (Purusha Prayatna). The word > Drudhavratah is associated with this word, which means that the > practical effort comes only by firm determination. > > > PRAJWAL PRABHU > > MAURITIUS > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madhumangala Das Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 Although I am a Vaisnava, I think the most important thing is developing a personal relationship with a specific aspect of the Supreme, be it Krsna, Siva or Shakti and offer yourself in love and devotion. The name is not important because God knows what is in your heart. Shivaism and Vishnuism as they appear in modern India differ invarious ways but most importantly in one principal area: Vishnuites worship Lord Vishnu as Supreme Lord and Shivaites worship Lord Shiva as Supreme Lord. There are some Shivaite sects who recognize Lord Vishnu's superior position but it is not the case of Vaishnavites. They call Lord Shiva Jagadisha (Lord of the Universe), whereas Vaisnavas Lord Vishnu as He is the True Lord of the Universe. This attitude of the Vaishnavities is highly offensive to Lord shivaites, Followers of Iskcon have gone one step forward by making vague comments on Shiva, Ganesha and other Hindus Gods. You accept that Shiva is the greatest devotee of Vishnu (Parama Bhagavata Uttama). You quote the scripture also in this context (Vaishnavanaam Yatha Sambhuh). In such case, a follower of Vishnu who insults Lord Shiva must be ashamed, since he is contradicting the very philosophy of the original preacher of his own Vaishnava cult. The scriptures also say that Krishna worshiped Lord Shiva and also Narayana worshiped Lord Shiva on the mountain of Meru. The scripture also says that Lord Vishnu became Mohini and became the wife of Lord Shiva and gave birth to Sashta. Therefore, it is foolish to fight with each other without understanding the preachers and the various forms of the same God. Narayana means the source of divine knowledge. This word indicates only Parabrahman. The knowledge is not the inherent sign of the unimaginable God (Parabrahman). God is only the source or basis for the knowledge. This is indicated by the word Narayana. Shiva means auspicious without any second impurity. God being the absolute truth is one without second and therefore, becomes the purest entity. Purity is the auspicious quality (Shiva). The Veda also says that Shiva is one without second (Advaitah Shivah). Rudra means the God, who punishes the sinners and make them weep (Rodayati iti Rudrah). If you recognize the concept of unimaginable God and the energetic forms as media, you will be clear. I appreciate you for having come to the height of the human incarnation (Manusheem Tanum Asritam - Gita). You will come to the final point of the divine knowledge, if you accept the existence of human incarnation in every generation by following the same Gita. A year back when I was on a trip to Bangalore, i made a visit to an Iskcon Temple in Bangalore (Mind you their are two temples divided on two different vaishnava Ideology). However, i made a visit to a visit to smaller temple known as Puri Jaganath temple in an interior locality. I came across a group of women discussing greatness about vaishnavism, Krishna bhakti etc., Seated at a corner, one middle aged women approached me and introduced herself as Shamabhavi. She inquired about me and I introduced myself and told her that I am on a visit to India and am learning about the Greatnes of both Vaishnavism and Shavism. Without giving time any room she started her discourses from Bhagavad Gita, Srimad Bhagavtham. She kept on talking about Vaishnavism and at the regular intervals spitting venom on Shaivism. Inspite my disinterest in her subject, she kept pouncing with her over sub-dued knowledge, she did not have mercy on me and kept speaking. I was so upset with the way she kept making derogatory remarks on Lord Shiva and his consort Goddess Shakti, Even other Gods like Muruga, Ganeshji were not spared. It was indeed offensive on her part to insult Shiva and her followers by stating that they are followers of Maya who will never attain liberation. When I lost my patience, i interrogated her like, like what authority does she possess or Iskcon have to blasphemy other gods? She felt perplexed, and subsequently, she kept saying that Krishna is Supreme and others are Demi-gods and we should not pray. It did not stop her their. She quoted from a Iskcon Text " that all followers of Iskcon were natural Brahmins and are sure to attain liberation on the judgement day " . However when I put the same question in an affivermative manner about Shaivties, she remarked " They cannot attain liberation " . Despite hearing all nonesense from that middle aged lady who already claims that Vaishnava Heavens are at Doorstep, i could only feel pity on her ignorance and arrogance what in sanskrit is known as Aaankhar. I was no mood to argue with that lady very soon we exchanged greetings and our contact numbers, I left the place. However if someone wishes to give that lady some lessons of Both vaishnavism and Shaivaism, you may contact her on 0091 80 23369779, her name is . Shamabhavi. That was the only number she has provided me at that time In this spiritual ladder, the Iskcon is a conservative Hinduism. They believe only one past human incarnation like conservative Christians who believe Jesus only. In this stage the development of their aspects shall be done by generalizing the same God in all the past human incarnations through Universal Spirituality (Krishna, Buddha, Jesus etc.,). They should also extend such generalized concept to the present human incarnation also. You can apply the philosophy of Advaita to all the human incarnations instead of all the human beings. Just like the same soul (Pure awareness) exists in all the human beings, similarly the same unimaginable God exists in all the human incarnations. The same concept can be applied to a specified group of energetic forms like Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva etc. Only such divine specific energetic forms are equal since the same unimaginable God exists in all those specified energetic forms. You should not generalize this concept to all the energetic forms like Indra, Vayu etc. Such concept will remove the misunderstanding in the followers of Ramanuja and Madhva who feel that only one energetic form 'Narayana' (Vishnu) is God. I am amazed to see this conservative concept even in the formless aspect of God! The Brahman of Hindus, the Jehovah of Christians and Allah of Muslims are formless. But still they fight with each other even in this formless aspect of God. That means they are differentiating the formless air as Hindu air, Christian air and Muslim air! At least we can excuse the difference in the forms of God, since the external forms differ. Krishna and Jesus differ in the external forms and the unity is only in the internal God. I assuredly tell you that you will not get the final salvation unless you are liberated from this conservative bond. What is the use of liberation from all the bonds except one bond? You are relieved from the ties of several ropes but if one tie of rope still exists, you cannot be declared as the completely liberated soul. You say that Krishna generated Rudra to mislead some devotees in the spiritual path. Krishna is a recent incarnation whereas Rudra exists even before the birth of Krishna. It is said in Bhagavatam that Krishna did penance for Lord Shiva. If you say that Narayana is fixed in Lord Vishnu only as a word of Yoga Rudha, then we can also fix words like Shiva, Ishwara, Maheswara etc., in Lord Rudra as words of Yoga Rudha. In Gita spoken by Lord Krishna, the words like Ishwara and Maheswara exist in the place of God (Ishwara Sarva Bhutanam, Mayinamtu Maheswaram, Karta Bhokta Maheswarah etc.,). This means your Lord Krishna Himself accepted that Lord Rudra is God. In the Veda, the word Eesha is used to mean God in the beginning of Eesavaasya Upanishat. Shankara diverted atheists who were demons to become theists only. He did not mislead any soul from good to bad. God always tries to uplift the souls but does not mislead any soul. But He was constrained by limitations. The standards of atheists cannot be raised suddenly from ground to sky in which case they will go back. In the view of such psychology, Shankara dragged them up to some distance, which is the maximum extent in their case. Above that there is the danger of fatigue. He purposefully told that soul is God so that the atheist is attracted by His native ambition and at least accept the existence of God. You say that such trick of Shankara as misleading the soul! In that case, the mother who gives food to her child by stating that the moon will come down if the child eats the food is also fraud and cheating the child! Shankara and Ramanuja know the spiritual knowledge from beginning to end because both are the incarnations of the same God. Shankara introduced that much part of the truth which alone can maintain the receivers. More than that will end in the total damage. This is not the fault of Shankara. It is the limitation of standards of the then atheists to whom only Shankara had to preach. When Ramanuja came the situation was better. He handled the believers in God. He separated God from the soul. He showed God in the energetic form called as Narayana. He could not introduce the human incarnation (Krishna) because the theists could not digest the human form of God at that time. Up to this everything is correct in view of the then existing standards of the receivers. You say that simple theoretical devotion is sufficient to please God and you quoted a verse from the Gita (Satatam keertayantah...). What about other verses which praise the practical devotion like the sacrifice of work and fruit of work? Even in your verse, you have not understood the meaning of " Yatantascha Drudhavratah " . The word Yatantah means practical effort (Purusha Prayatna). The word Drudhavratah is associated with this word, which means that the practical effort comes only by firm determination. PRAJWAL PRABHU MAURITIUS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.