What's wrong with vishistathvaidha?

[Guest guest]

If we accept vishistathvaidha and shaivism then immediately we do a great harm to Hinduism. This rule applies to ganapathyam(worship of ganesh alone),souram(sun),

Saktham(parvathi), pasupatham etc.But for argument sake I take only vishisthathvaidham. But kindly bear in mind that this holds true for these other non vedic religion like ganapathyam,saktham,pasupatham, vaishnavam , shaivism also

 

(Don’t ask me why you keep the surname vaishnava. I cannot change my name which my parents gave me,ok?)

 

Once you accept vishisthathvaidham, you immediately push Hinduism to Paganism. Already muslims and Christians mock at our religion saying we worship 33 crore gods. But we know that we are monostheistic. But if we accept vishisthathvaidham we immediately become a pagan religion, that is one having 33 crore gods. Only advaitha principle makes hindus monotheistic.

 

How vishisthathvaidha is paganism? Isnt it about worshipping only one god, lord Vishnu? No. The definition of monotheism is not only about worshiping one god, but having one god. If we tell Christians that we have 33 crore gods, but we worship only one they will laugh at you.

 

Even the staunchest of vishithathvaidhis will never say that there isn’t shiva or ganesh. He will say “They are there. They are gods. But we need not worship them”. What logic is this? If we don’t have any need to worship them, then why did Lord Krishna create them?(I don’t mean this, but this is what vishishthathvidhis will say, Krishna created all gods, including shiva) If Krishna created shiva to worship him, then what is a vaishnava’s status vis a vis lord shiva? Vishisthathvidhis will say “ A true vaishnava is better than lord shiva. He is no way inferior to lord shiva” Friends, how can we tolerate this? I don’t say this since I hold shiva in esteem. For me, all is same bhramman. But I wonder at their logic. If they believe a vaishnava is better than lord shiva, then it only shows by what extent they are religious.(to put it mildly)

 

Why Am I attacking vishisthathvaidhis so vehemently? Is it because I am an advaithi? No. I will in fact hold every vishithathvaidhi’s feet in my head, since they have done a great service to Hinduism, which no advaithi has done. These people have gone to USA and spread Krishna there. Right or wrong, they love lord Krishna, with a belief that is as strong as Mother seetha’s love on lord ram. They spread basics of Hinduism like Geetha and Non-vegetarianism, everywhere. They worship their guru’s equal to god, which advaithi’s fail to do. So I am ready to worship the feet of every vishithathvaidhi for what they have done. They are the torch bearers of Hinduism in west.

 

The real challenge for every hindu is not to infight, but to unite and fight against conversions, terrorism and atheism. I believe that we should re convert the entire world into Hinduism. I am doing what I can in this regard. If anyone of you can visit some Christian sites and Islamic sites in , you can find lengthy debates in my name. If you want you can support me also there.

So coming to the point, why I am opposing vishithathvaidham, its only because I believe that the true meaning of Vedas should not be degraded. When gokul says that sthalapurans of rameshwaram temple is false, what will Christians reading this forum think about us? When these people refuse to worship ganesh, which is a thing which every hindu has to do, before starting to do any thing, then am I wrong in telling them that they have to do so? Let them worship Vishnu, but stop insulting other gods. Give them their due, what is given in Vedas. Vedas have mentioned every god as parabhramman, including shiva, Vishnu, indhra, varun and agni. Then which portion of Vedas do you support? Is mandukya Upanishad lying when it says “Parabhramman is shivam?”

 

If Gokul has read Ramayan as he claims to do, let him tell that vashiata did not tell Ram about Lord Karthikeya? Vashita told ram about karthikeya and told him that every ksathriya should worship lord Karthikeya.

 

Searching for syamanthaka diamond, Krishna faced lots of problems. He saw the fourth day moon and suffered. He prayed to ganesh and ganesh removed his ill name. Ganesh then said “ From now on, none should see fourth day moon. If any body sees it, he will suffer. But if he reads or hears this story I will wash away that sin.” Now if you say this is a lie, then you can better join atheistic list. That is again another problem with these vishithathvaidhis. They will reject half Vedas and purans. They will accept vaishnavite purans and claim that shaivite purans are fictions. Shaivites will accept shaivite purans and refuse Vishnu purans saying that it is lie. In end, Christians will conclude that everything is fiction.

 

I was reading Vishnu puran and I was disgusted to say the least. In it was mentioned that krishna’s son prathyumna defeated shiva, tied him an a rope along with karthikeya and ganesh. Then Krishna tells shiva that “Don’t forget that you are inferior to me and my devotees.” I did not read shiva puran, but I am sure that if I read it Vishnu would have been degraded there.

 

The end result is that both these people are degrading Hinduism. I ask both people to worship whomever they want. But atleast follow basic guidelines in Vedas. Worship gods like navagrahas, ganesh and sun . Sun should be worshipped daily. Navagrahas should be worshipped at your birth days and change of grahas date. Ganesh should be worshipped before doing anything. Atleast once. Then you worship Krishna for hours. We all will join you. Hold Krishna as bhramman. I also will join you. Stop ridiculing sthalapurans and traditional hindu beliefs.

 

I bet that these people one day will stop worshiping agni when they get married. They might marry before Krishna photo,instead of agni. Who knows?

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Only advaitha principle makes hindus monotheistic.

--advaita is a risk to be atheist (i have said risk, not that it's atheism) not monotheist

 

If we tell Christians that we have 33 crore gods, but we worship only one they will laugh at you.

--call them angels, call them assistants.. god is one (krsna/vishnu) and he is the master of all devas as written in the gita. No need to change anything to be not criticized

 

These people have gone to USA and spread Krishna there. Right or wrong, they love lord Krishna

--hare krsna (gaudya vaishnava sampradaya) is not dvaita nor advaita.. is acynthia beda abeda tattva.. we are different and non different from god, different in quantity and the same in quality

 

i have 20 yrs of preaching xperience in the west with christians (i was also born christian), but no one speak of us like polytheists, we had obviously critics, ooponents and some persecution in ex ussr but no one who ridicule us saying we are polytheist

 

 

They spread basics of Hinduism like Geetha and Non-vegetarianism, everywhere.

--basics and esoterics, primary and high school

 

They worship their guru’s equal to god,

--wrong.. we worship guru as messenger of god, not as god

 

So coming to the point, why I am opposing vishithathvaidham, its only because I believe that the true meaning of Vedas should not be degraded

--this is your theory, many think, me included, that vedas speak of a supreme god i three aspects (bhagavan, paramatma, bhagavan) and, as a president or king, with many directors or ministers in the various energy of nature... devatas (very simple, there's not any quarrelling in the west on this subject)

 

When these people refuse to worship ganesh, which is a thing which every hindu has to do

--ganesh is to be worshipped as great devotee of krsna, and if you do not worship him formally, you do it everytime you open bhagavad gita.. so where's the problem?

 

Let them worship Vishnu, but stop insulting other gods.

--you have not to use the word "them"... who insults devatas is a great aparadhi, irreligious, demon and he has any connection with vaishnavism even if he thinks to be vaishnava. So please be more careful with your judgements

 

The end result is that both these people are degrading Hinduism.

--do not identify gokul with vaishnavism as i do not want to identify your not so much competent judgements with advaitism, please be more careful

 

. Sun should be worshipped daily

--gayatri, from immemorial time all vaishnava brahmanas chant gayatri

 

I bet that these people one day will stop worshiping agni when they get married. They might marry before Krishna photo,instead of agni. Who knows?

--better to say honestly that you have some ego clashing with gokul than throw mud to people that you are demosntrating to know not too much

 

wy not be more careful, to blaspheme spiritualists (of any beliefs) is never a very good thing, it is against any dharma

[Guest guest]

who insults devatas is a great aparadhi, irreligious, demon and he has any connection with vaishnavism

 

wrong

 

...NO connection .... this si the sense that i want to give

[Guest guest]

Hare Krishna,

 

When one rejects some puranas(in Vaishnavism), it is based on Vedas. Vedas clearly point that Lord Visnu is the Supreme GOD. Existence of other Devatas or gods is also a reality. But all these gods or Devatas worship Lord Visnu.

[Guest guest]

Thers nothing wrong in "Vishishtadvaitha".

 

Vishistadvaitha is supported by vedas, whereas "your" kaivaladvaitham is not supported by vedas.

 

Vaishnavas only follow sampradayas that are supported by vedas. so vaishnvaas reject kaivaladvaitha.

 

who says vaishnavas reject/insult other gods ?

 

you seem to be a confused kid having a blurry knowledge of vaishnvam.

 

Madhvas worship Ganesha, Skanda, Surya, Devi & Rudra just like "shankaras". only difference is shankaras give more importance to shiva, wheeras madhvas give more importance to vishnu.

 

SwamiNarayana sects also worship rudra & other dieities. but they too like madhvas give much importance to vishnu/swaminarayana rather than other.

 

All Vaishnava sects consider "Rudra" as a Great Jagadguru. Rudra, Lakshmi, Brahma & Sanat kumaras are considered as four jagadgurus of vaishnavam. Here you can see rudra given equal status to lakshmi, but brahma is not given much importance (i dunno why). so Rudra is reverred by vaishnavas.

 

Just because vaishnvas dont see as Rudra/ganesha as supreme, you cant tell that vaishnavas as anti-hindus. if you tell like that, then i can also tell that shaivatees also are anti-hindu as they dont consider vishnu as supreme. dont u think it as illogical ???

 

Priya from your posts its clear that you are a student. so better concentrate on ur studies rather than banging on your head with such topics. Of course, you should be spiritual at sametime, but that doesnt mean you should be bang your head on such topics.

 

Priya Chant Hare krisha / Om Namo Narayana (if you want) & cool down.

 

if you want i will post about "Vishistadvaitha" so that you can see vishishtadvaitha makes sense than advaitham. you should come to a conclusion regarding a philosophy only after studying opponents view. i am sure that u dunno anything about vishistadvaitha/dwaita/shuddhadvaita. u just have read something about advaitham. that alone is not enough to judge.

 

i think this post will make some sense to you.

 

/images/graemlins/smile.gif Om Namah Shivaya

/images/graemlins/smile.gif Om Namo Venkatesaya

[Guest guest]

Gokul,

 

Quoting our words, "[...]from your posts its clear that you are a student. so better concentrate on ur studies rather than banging on your head with such topics. Of course, you should be spiritual at sametime, but that doesnt mean you should be bang your head on such topics," shows a lack of sensitivity for someone's urge to pursue spiritual growth.

History is full of examples of people seeking spiritual truths and trying to solve spiritual conflicts for their own peace and for that of the society's: Madhavacharya, Shankaracharya, and many others have moved on their paths. I do not think that you have the right to condescend and stifle anyone from the topics they choose to discuss.

 

From your words, you seem to be an older person; it is not wise on your part to respond so immaturely.

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

all i can say is u didnt understood properly my message to priya. let her decide regarding my post. why are u sneaking your nose unnessarily, as i didnt suggested anything to you.

 

/images/graemlins/smile.gif Jai Shri Krishna

/images/graemlins/smile.gif Om Shri Guru Raghavendraswamy Namaha

[Guest guest]

This is a discussion board. If you have cared to post your opinions publicly, be ready to face the consequences publicly. You answered to Priya as a student, and as I am a student; it affects me too, but I guess I don't want to argue with you on that point any more, as it would be a digression on this discussion thread!

 

[Guest guest]

Although I understand the philosophical point of view of Advaita and it's relation to science, it may be intellectual but it is rather dry. I also think it's quite impractical to follow - to see everything as God and is probably recommended just for sanyasis, rather than common people. I see Vishistadvaita to be far more practical and it looks like Monotheism to me, I don't know how you (Priya) think it is polytheism. I think it's the tradition of vaishnavism that bothers you not the theology. With Advaita you're getting confused with the tradition - Smarthism which states all manifestations are one and the same.

 

Please read this article on Ramanuja and Vishishtadvaita and tell me what problem you have with Vishistadvaita?

 

http://www.boloji.com/hinduism/011.htm

 

The site below has some good articles on Hinduism.

 

http://www.boloji.com/hinduism/index.htm

[Guest guest]

I too dont want to argue with people like you, as you actually dont have enough intelligence to understand my posts.

[SuBrahaman]

Dear All,

 

kindly read my point of view as someone who is willing to discuss but not as someone who is trying to force or preach a thought.

 

I truely believe that God would be upset and feel the pain that his children are hit by sheer ignorance when we speak about one form of God being powerful or supreme and others being not so powerful or inferior.

How can god be inferior to himself?

First of all to think superior and inferior when it comes to God it self is meanigless. What message are we trying to communicate by doing this?

 

I think the real topic we should be discussing is " what do we understand of God ? "

 

 

Let us get on to basics

 

All of us agree that our physical body is driven by a force/Chaitanya/energy/atma/soul which by itself do not exhibit any forms or names.

 

All the souls are derived from GOD or PARABRHMAN himself

even the so called "non living things" are derived from God. There is nothing in this universe which is independent of God.

 

Now if you look at PARABRAHMAN in his original state ( PARAMATHMA) can he have a form (RUPA) ?. Just like his own

reflections or parts of him ( all of us) won't have a form(rupa) when away from a body(AATMA), God Perhaps won't have a form in his true form. He does not need to have one. But whenever it is necessary for him to do a KARMA for securing DHARAMA he will attain a form (Remember by doing this God is not attached to any KARMA) we call him then as Lordh Vishnu, Lord Shiva, Lord Brahma and so on..

All these are forms of God for a purpose and so is meaning less to compare these forms as superior or inferior to one another.. because after the Avatara is over he will be united with PARABRAHMA who is formless (PARAMATMA) and present all the time

 

It is us who perhaps become so fond of some forms of the parabrhman that we fall in love with his form and we may not believe and like others forms as much

 

Just like how few poeple have role models, stars, actors etc and they often ridicule other entity who is perhaps a role model or a hero for some one else.

 

But this is huaman nature, untill we sweep away the ignorance and discover through right source knowlege that we are actaully part of the PARABRAHMAN himself and our ultimate goal should be to join him by being unattached to all worldy matters to be free of all the worries and mayas and there by destroying all our good/bad karamas ( a neutrlized state).

 

 

So i believe, the Dhwaita and Adwaita siddhantas only appear to be different when looked at surface, but other wise both say the same truth of PARABRAHMAN.

 

Adwaita Says " Both PARABRAHMAN and BRAHMAN(AATMAN) are same"

 

Dwaita Says " PARABRAHMAN and BRAHMAN(AATMAN) are different

but BRAHMAN is Dependent on PARABRHAMAN, and ULTIMATE goal of life is to union with PARABRAHMAN"

 

 

What is the issue here..? what is the difference?

 

i believe both are same and both are true and right.

but the truth is being said in a slightly different manner

 

If you carefully look at the two siddhanthas

Adwaita says " Because you are ultimaely bound to get unioned with that PARABRAHMAN, you are bound to be exhibiting same charactristics at the time of union, and that is whay AATMAN is same as PARABRHAMAN

 

On the other hand Dwaitas are saying " Because though the AATMAN is part of the Lordhimself, he is not like lord as he has some karma attached to him and that is why he is born here and having a body so is different from PARABRHAMAN.

 

So both the principles essentially are communicating the same message only difference being the "Phase" of the cycle at which the doctrine is esatblished or formed

 

 

LET US THANK ALL SANATHAN DHRAMA RISHI's, AACHARYAS and each and every one who were so close to God and learned the

eternal truth and blessed us with divine knowledge

 

Thanks

SuBrahman

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Please dont get me wrong, but how meaningful is agruing about the theories of Advaita and Dvaita and Achintya Bheda Bhed when we really have no proof where we go after we leave this body.

 

Wouldn't it be better to have some patience and wait for after death to find if we get merged in the infinite God or go to heaven and have an eternal relation with God or maintain a inbetween relation. Isn't it more logical to help each other, love each other and have peace between each other rather that argue on theories expounded by great philosophers.

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hi, I am Rohit and I just browsed this website out of curiosity. I was a little surprised to come across Hindus who are so fundamentalist. It is very strange to see that we Hindus have classified God based on schools of thought. I agree with you Hrithik, and I believe that I am a rationalist. I believe that spirituality is an extremely abstract topic, but I also believe that there is only one God and the Hindu "Krisna" is just as same as the Christian "God" or the muslim "Allah."

 

I believe that I have a personal relation with God and that is all that is important. I know that I love him and that he has a purpose for me in this world. But, I guess there is nothing more essential to be known beyond this. Whether there is maya or not is immaterial, what is important that we must live and be good children of God by making this world a better place to live by feeding the hungry, clothing the naked and helping people in need.

 

If you think that if I consider all this dicussion is immaterial, why am I here stating all this? well, the reason that I wanted to share my belief with you. My purpose is not to pass a judgement on anyone of you that you are wrong or right, but just a make a point that "is it that important to discuss abstract issues and be so stubborn about it as absolute truth" based on literary texts like the Vedas, Upanishads and Bhramhasutras...?

 

With the help of our vocabulary, some came up with the word "Krishna" some with "God" or "Allah" and that, no way, does not challenge his presence.

 

But, pushing literary points and arguing about its validity...is maybe, pushing it too far.

[Guest guest]

 

hmm... interesting thoughts. I would maintain that what is happening here is a mere exchange of words, techinical( if you could call them so) terms which in some way or the other donot exemplify what the original thought behind the pohilosphy is. Stop fighting over glorified history. History is what happened in the past, think about how we will be able to sustain our traditions in the coming decades. I for one have a very strong belief that schools of thought are the first step to fundamentalism. The whole concept of organized religion seems so farcical to me. Talk about our ancestors, with all due respect, it doesnt mean a thing to talk about krishna suffering after seing the moon on the 4th day. Even if is sufferings were answered, how do you think it would apply to you? Think ratonally! We have had HUMANS on the moon, and you still think seeing the moon on certain days would bring you harm? remembering your past is nice, but reliving it is absolute nonsense!! How could you believe in anything outwardly divine(ie. divinity outside our own physical/mental self) when you know its all related to YOUR own mind? I would like to bring that point previously stated about nepotic spiritualism, favouritism. It simply means that you believe in what you like, thats human nature. Is there anything "technical" to it? I really wouldnt know as i am notwell versed in attacking my own religious brothers on how THEIR beliefs are so wrong! Organised religion is a farce, at the same time, paganism isnt in any way bad or good! ITS JUST A WORD!When a prophet as you could call one, documents one's beliefs, all you are doing is simply reading his beliefs out and exounding it. How does that make it divine? If i were to be given the name of prophet, i would write that God told me last night not to allow people to wear seatbelts while driving as it would not please me one bit to see my children chained in that manner, 200 years from now seatbelts wouldnt exist for pple who believe in me. Isnt that a little too earthy to believe? As all of you know, 100 years after something is documented, its history, 500 years later, its a movement, 1000 years later, its a religion! Fundamentally, every religion is too flawed to attain the status it enjoys today.

I just hope my neo-rationalistic rantings made some sense to you.

 

Regards.

[Guest guest]

"was reading Vishnu puran and I was disgusted to say the least. In it was mentioned that krishna’s son prathyumna defeated shiva, tied him an a rope along with karthikeya and ganesh. Then Krishna tells shiva that “Don’t forget that you are inferior to me and my devotees.” I did not read shiva puran, but I am sure that if I read it Vishnu would have been degraded there."

 

 

Priya Ji,

 

I can feel your agony at such stories. But on maturing you will not have agony.

 

Any one can bind Shiva -- with love. With great love you can make Lord your servant and dictate terms.

 

Whatever other people may say, know that true devotion binds Lord to the devotee. Below, I give an evidence.

 

From The Mahabharata, Anusasana Parva

Section XIV

 

Krishna -16000 Wives

 

The blessed Vishnu said: "I salute Mahadeva. Salutations to Thee. O Thou that art eternal origin of all things. The Rishis say that Thou art the Lord of the Vedas. The righteous say that Thou art Penance, Thou art Sattwa, Thou art Rajas, Thou art Tamas, and Thou art truth…….

 

The puissant Sankara then, devoted to the good of the universe, looked at the goddess Uma and the lord of the celestials and myself also, and thus spoke unto me":

 

"We know, O Krishna, that Thou, O slayer of foes, art filled with the greatest devotion towards us. Do what is for Thy good. My love and affection for Thee is very great. Do Thou ask for eight boons. I shall verily give them unto Thee. O Krishna, O best of all persons, tell me what they are, O chief of the Yadavas. Name what Thou wishest. However difficult of attainment they be, Thou shalt have them still".

 

The blessed Krishna said: "Bowing my head with great joy unto that mass of energy and effulgence, I said these words unto that great Deity, with a heart filled with gladness, -firmness in virtue, the slaughter of foes in battle, the highest fame, the greatest might, devotion to Yoga, Thy adjacence, and hundreds upon hundreds of children- these are the boons I solicit of Thee".

 

"So be it" said Sankara, repeating the words I had uttered. After this, the Mother of the universe, the upholder of all things, who cleanses all things, who is the spouse of Sarva (Siva), that vast receptacle of penances said with a restrained soul these words unto me:

 

"The puissant Mahadeva has granted Thee, O sinless one, a son who shall be named Samva. Do Thou take from me also eight boons which Thou choosest. I shall certainly grant them to Thee"

 

Bowing unto her my head, I said unto her:

 

"I solicit from thee non-anger against the Brahmanas (Brahmins), grace of my father, a hundred sons, the highest enjoyments, love for my family, the grace of my mother, the attainment of tranquillity and peace, and cleverness in every act!"

 

Uma said: "It shall be even so, O Thou that art possessed of prowess and puissance equal to that of a celestial. I never say what is untrue. Thou shalt have sixteen thousand wives. Thy love for them and theirs also for Thee shall be unlimited. From all Thy kinsmen also, Thou shalt receive the highest affection. Thy body too shall be most beautiful. Seven thousand guests will daily feed at Thy palace."

 

Vasudeva continued: "Having thus granted me boons both the god and the goddess disappeared there and then with their Ganas. All these wonderful facts, I related fully to that brahmana of great energy, viz., Upamanyu (from whom I had obtained the Diksha before adoring Mahadeva). Bowing down unto the great God, Upamanyu said these words to me" :

 

Upamanyu said: "There is no deity like Sarva. There is no end or refuge like Sarva. There is none that can give so many or such high boons. There is none that equals him in battle."

_

 

The story you cited is true as this that I have cited above.

 

Now Priya Ji please carefully read the following extract from

BRIHADARANYAKA-UPANISHAD Part 1

 

 

FOURTH BRAHMANA.

 

1. In the beginning this was Self alone, in the shape of a person (purusha). He looking round saw nothing but his Self. He first said, 'This is I;' therefore he became I by name. Therefore even now, if a man is asked, he first says, 'This is I,' and then pronounces the other name which he may have. And because before (purva) all this, he (the Self) burnt down (ush) all evils, therefore he was a person (pur-usha). Verily he who knows this, burns down every one who tries to be before him.

-----

7. Now all this was then undeveloped. It became developed by form and name, so that one could say, 'He, called so and so, is such a one. ' Therefore at present also all this is developed by name and form, so that one can say,'He, called so and so, is such a one.'

---------

 

10. Verily in the beginning this was Brahman, that Brahman knew (its) Self only, saying, 'I am Brahman.' From it all this sprang. Thus, whatever Deva was awakened (so as to know Brahman), he indeed became that (Brahman); and the same with Rishis and men. The Rishi Vamadeva saw and understood it, singing, 'I was Manu (moon), I was the sun.'

 

 

Therefore now also he who thus knows that he is Brahman, becomes all this, and even the Devas cannot prevent it, for he himself is their Self.

 

Now if a man worships another deity, thinking the deity is one and he another, he does not know. He is like a beast for the Devas. For verily, as many beasts nourish a man, thus does every man nourish the Devas. If only one beast is taken away, it is not pleasant; how much more when many are taken! Therefore it is not pleasant to the Devas that men should know this.

End of citation

 

Therefore it is not pleasant to the Devas that men should know this.

 

Try to understand this. Read it again carefully. You will know that stories are written cryptically -- revealing truth to mature souls only.

 

 

[Guest guest]

{I was reading Vishnu puran and I was disgusted to say the least. In it was mentioned that krishna’s son prathyumna defeated shiva, tied him an a rope along with karthikeya and ganesh. Then Krishna tells shiva that “Don’t forget that you are inferior to me and my devotees.” I did not read shiva puran, but I am sure that if I read it Vishnu would have been degraded there.}

 

With all respect I have for Hinduism some of the puranic stories such as that above seem so rediculous, I wonder how anyone can actually believe them. But isn't all the gods supposed to be different manifestations of the one. Then why was vishnu tying up shiva and ganesh? Was he having fun with himself? Was he saying that his different manifestation are inferior.

 

I would still like to know what is wrong with Vishistadvaita.

[Guest guest]

I have stopped arguing with visitathvaidhis even though i'm an advaithi.After all I believe that they are in the smae path as me.So no debates with them.I posted this thread before 6 months.Now I have important tasks before me.To educate the other religions about our culture.I am doing it in USA now.I already made my friend half vegetarian.

 

Nothing is wrong with visitathvaidhis.They do a great job in USA.No more debates on this with my brothers.