Why Vaishnavites insult Shaivtes

[Guest guest]

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

[Guest guest]

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

[Guest guest]

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

[Guest guest]

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

>

[Guest guest]

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

>

[Guest guest]

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 ---

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.

[Guest guest]

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.

>

[Guest guest]

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>

[Guest guest]

....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!

[Guest guest]

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

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

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

>

[Madhumangala Das 0]

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 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