Shiva versus Vishnu: Who is greater?

[Rajashekhar 0]

If one thinks deeply about it, both Shiva and Vishnu are imaginations in the minds of our ancestors.

 

Shiva was conceived in the minds of the sages who sat in the mountain ranges of Himalayas contemplating the divine. They saw the Sun rise regularly and provide warmth. So they first called Surya, the great God. Then Surya became indistinguishable from Rudra.

 

Then the concept of Rudra grew. First they equated Rudra with Surya. Then they looked at the blue sky (although they had no idea why it was blue) and they imagined the divinity to be blue-throated, with the earth in His belly. They looked at the dark clouds and imagined Him with a snake around His neck. They decided that Surya and Chandra were His eyes; then they added a third eye of Knowledge (or Power) to Him (Agni) and called Him Virupaaksha. They saw the rain water pouring down from the heavens and imagined Ganges to be in His matted head. The shloka: "Brahmaanda Vyaaptha Deha.." in the Laghunyasa was composed.

 

Other sages saw the mountains being washed by the rain water and viola, the Linga and Rudra-Abhishekam idea came about.

 

Vishnu was conceived in a similar manner, although Krishna was the primary driving force for the birth of Vishnu concept in the minds of Parashar and Badarayana Vyasa. Vishnu was conceived much much later.

 

And the devotees were first all dedicated to Shiva and later there were devotees of both Shiva and Vishnu.

 

The devotees of Shiva portrayed Him as a humane divinity, who is easily pleased (Ashuthosha) is fierce (Ghora) as well as calm (Aghora), but is always auspicious (Shiva). The devotees of Vishnu portrayed Him as a slayer of Asuras and a tricky personality that does not worry too much about the means to the end, as long as the end is reached.

 

Devotees of Vishnu portrayed Him as a slayer of Asuras, protector (at any cost) of Indra.

 

There were too many quarrerls between Shaivites and Vaishnavites so Skandopanishad makes the famous statement: Shivaaya Vishnuroopaaya Shivaroopaaya Vishnave...

 

Hence we should not be thinking whether Shiva is greater or Vishnu that is greater. The real question is: Were the Shiva devotees smarter or the Vishnu devotees smarter.

 

Apparently the Shiva devotees were a lot smarter bunch.

 

Think about it: Shiva Sahasranaama states:

 

"Devaasura Vinirmaatha ... Devaasura Guruh... Devaasura Namaskrithah...."

 

Shiva is pictured as being bowed down to by Devas and Asuras. He is the Guru for both gods and demons, and He alone created both gods and the demons. Only the truly Supreme Being creates, teaches, protects and is worshipped by both Devas and Asuras. Unfortunately the devotees of Vishnu could not conceive such brilliant ideas.

 

In the meanwhile, the Vaishnavites came about and portrayed Shiva as Bhola (slow-witted) and thus inferior to Vishnu. Tulasidas did a great job in making Shiva a devotee of Vishnu, although there are innumerable instances in the Puranas that prove that Vishnu was a devotee of Shiva.

 

But the bottom line is that the Shiva devotees were a lot smarter group. They portrayed Shiva in the proper light. Vishnu-Bhakthas failed to do this.

[Guest guest]

So mr.rajashekar,

 

You think you have figured out everything.

 

So how do you prove that your ignorant ramblings and nonsense are factual.

 

Readers just go through this fool's posts. You will realize, this fool rajashekar is here to cause problems. I said before this person is a DK from tamil nadu.

[Guest guest]

if you are scientifically demonstrating that one, even without any help, can fill a forum page with nonsenses, i appreciate... but i already knew it..

 

the difficult thing is to write the truth..

[Guest guest]

***** If one thinks deeply about it, both Shiva and Vishnu are imaginations in the minds of our ancestors. *******

 

The first point. In another thread you have said Vedas (shrutis) are the pramanas. I hope I need not copy paste from there. So what is the truth? Are these imaginations or are these shrutis -- the pramanas? Be consistent please.

 

The second point. You are partly echoing Upanishads, but very wrongly. What is the source of the pure minds wherein the shrutis were delivered? Lord Pragnya is the root.

 

 

***** If one thinks deeply about it ********

 

The pramanas that you accepted -- in the beginning -- refutes that thoughts can reach the truth.

 

 

Are you consistent?

 

[Guest guest]

 

Shiva is pictured as being bowed down to by Devas and Asuras. He is the Guru for both gods and demons, and He alone created both gods and the demons. Only the truly Supreme Being creates, teaches, protects and is worshipped by both Devas and Asuras. Unfortunately the devotees of Vishnu could not conceive such brilliant ideas.

 

 

Both groups believe that their GOD is the creator of everything.

 

As for protection, you think only protection of body is protection. Visnu punishes even HIS devotees if they act in adharmic way. It is not to get revenge, but to teach them dharma. So Asuras, who are by nature cruel, need a lot of punishment to teach them dharma. If you understood anything in Gita, you would know how great Vaisnava philosophy is ?

[Guest guest]

"If you understood anything in Gita, you would know how great Vaisnava philosophy is"

 

gita is neither for or against vishnu as the supreme. dont be fooled by the representation of the krishna avataar bringing the message and thus conclude that vishnu must be the supreme. god is represented to us in different forms, with all those forms being more attractive to different people who place their faith in what that manifestation has to offer. nobody can speculate for sure that these manifestations are real gods living on other planets or if they are forms conjured up by our anscestors to base worship on. shiva could be real and existing out there, or he could be simply a representation of the cosmic shakti, one functional component of the one supreme god. and how can you place priority of one god over another? it's foolish. in some puranas you read stories of how vishnu gauged out his own eye to worship shiva, and shiva gifted him with the sadarshana chakra. in other stories you hear of shiva granting a boon to a rakshasa, and then vishnu having to save shiva from his foolishness in giving the boon. are these holy stories or does it not sound to you like the religious fueds between the two groups again? as soon as people get caught up in all these arguments, they are losing sight of what pure god worship is about. THAT is why we are losing hindu's to conversion, to other religions that have clear monotheism, and clear understanding of what ONE god means.

[Guest guest]

"gita is neither for or against vishnu as the supreme. dont be fooled by the representation of the krishna avataar bringing the message"

 

bhagavat gita.. the song of bhagavan. Bhagavan is Krishna/Vishnu (decide yourself who's the sourceand who's the expansion, because i do not care.. god is one, both source and expansion are supreme)

 

"nobody can speculate for sure that these manifestations are real gods living on other planets or if they are forms conjured up by our anscestors to base worship on"

 

so why are you not following some your philosophy,but you are declaring yourself hindu?

Why hindu religion tells lies when speaks about forms and transcendental persons and you are still caring for hinduism?

 

"they are losing sight of what pure god worship is about."

 

pure means "not polluted".. so why pollute the great message of vedas/itihasas/upanishad/puranas with our poor human speculation believing that our mind is higher than scriptures??

 

understand that the one god has features, charachter, he relationate,he has name, he loves,he can be loved,he has expansions, companions, devotees.... that's god..not some dull concept

 

[Ganeshprasad 0]

Jai Ganesh

 

Re

(understand that the one god has features, charachter, he relationate,he has name, he loves,he can be loved,he has expansions, companions, devotees.... that's god..not some dull concept)

 

 

Or in short, the vedas proclaim "Ekam Sata Vipraha Bahudha Vadanti" or "Truth is One but the wise see it in Different Ways".

 

Jai Shree Krishna

 

[Rajashekhar 0]

[The first point. In another thread you have said Vedas (shrutis) are the pramanas. I hope I need not copy paste from there. So what is the truth?]

 

The truth is that there is no such thing as Pramana. I can point out a few examples of untruth in the Vedic literature, but I hope you are sufficiently well-read to know that. I don't consider the Vedas as the Pramanas, the staunch Hindus consider the Vedas as the Pramanas. I have written through various posts that I accept only what has been proven as truth, not something that is alleged to be the truth.

 

 

[The second point. You are partly echoing Upanishads, but very wrongly. What is the source of the pure minds wherein the shrutis were delivered? Lord Pragnya is the root.]

 

OK, I understand your point, but in what context?

 

[The pramanas that you accepted -- in the beginning -- refutes that thoughts can reach the truth.

 

 

[Are you consistent?]

 

I sure am, my dear Om. Like I have said before, what Hinduism believes and what Rajashekhar believes may not be the same thing. As long as you remember that, you won't have any trouble.

 

Let's keep talking. I like talking to you.

 

 

 

[Rajashekhar 0]

[so how do you prove that your ignorant ramblings and nonsense are factual.]

 

I am not saying that these are facts. I am proposing a theory for the way the concept of Shiva and Vishnu came into existence. It took many hundereds of years.

 

On the other hand, if you believe that Shiva and Vishnu are actual deities, then how do you believe they came into existence?

 

[Readers just go through this fool's posts. You will realize, this fool rajashekar is here to cause problems. I said before this person is a DK from tamil nadu. ]

 

So you are the person who has been hiding behind the name 'Guest' and calling me a fool. So far, I have not seen anything substantial from you. I can fully understand it. Have you read the 12th Chapter of Gita? Have you understood the substance of it?

 

But I refuse to call you bad names in return. Soon, I may begin to ignore your posts, but that could be profitable for me since it seems a waste of time to read and reply to your notes.

[Guest guest]

"Or in short, the vedas proclaim "Ekam Sata Vipraha Bahudha Vadanti" or "Truth is One but the wise see it in Different Ways".

 

 

of course... so if i accept that you see your way, i see my way, another sees his way there's two possibilities:

 

1-all ways are only in the mind of the wises.. so truth does not exist

2-all ways are there because truth has many aspects (gunas)

 

so who says that truth is (only)nirguna is actually against "Ekam Sata Vipraha Bahudha Vadanti"..

 

(how can i choose various ways if they aren't in the supreme?)

 

 

[Rajashekhar 0]

_________

of course... so if i accept that you see your way, i see my way, another sees his way there's two possibilities:

 

1-all ways are only in the mind of the wises.. so truth does not exist

2-all ways are there because truth has many aspects (gunas)

 

so who says that truth is (only)nirguna is actually against "Ekam Sata Vipraha Bahudha Vadanti"..

 

(how can i choose various ways if they aren't in the supreme?)

_________

 

If I may intervene here for a moment, the original verses in Yajurveda or Rigveda does not say 'paths'. And paths are not meant either. The word is 'names'.

 

Here is the translation, with the original text left out for brevity.

 

May it be called Agni, Aditya, Vayu or Chandrama

All are the NAMES of the Supreme Spirit

He is Brahma and Prajapati, the Supreme Lord of all

He is the ultimate power, protector of all beings

(Yajur 32.1)

 

That one supreme reality has been styled

By various names by te learned seers,

They call one by many names,

They speak of Him as Indra, the Lord resplendent;

Mitra, the surveyor; Varuna, the virtuous;

Agni, the adorable;

Garutman, the celestial and well-sung;

Yama, the ordainer; Matarishvan, the cosmic breath.

(Rig 1.164.46)

 

So they don't say all paths lead to Him. They merely say that He is called by many names.

 

In Kannada, the Sarvagnya Kavi says:

 

The great Yogi, Shiva, appears to the devotees of Hari as Hari, and, as Shiva to the devotees of Shiva.

There is only one path, and that is of righteousness and help to other people while ensuring that Jagath-Kalyana is taken care of: this means taking care of the environment, forests, animals and plants, as well.

 

I hope I have helped you here :-)

[Guest guest]

******* The truth is that there is no such thing as Pramana. *********

 

That is when in ekam advaitam where vac also is non-existent. But not before that. Vac being a pointer is pramana and not the truth itself.

 

******* I can point out a few examples of untruth in the Vedic literature, *********

 

No, I do not know. Please give examples.

 

 

******* [The second point. You are partly echoing Upanishads, but very wrongly. What is the source of the pure minds wherein the shrutis were delivered? Lord Pragnya is the root.]

 

OK, I understand your point, but in what context? ********

 

You have said earlier that gods are imaginations of sages. This is the subject of Upanishads.

 

I would like to differ with the word imagination. I would use Pragnya. The Lord Pragnya, who creates VAC.

 

Moerover, if you as body-mind is true, Iswara is true. When you truly become an Atma, then there is no God beside you. You have become Yuktatma and one.

 

But not before that. And I am not in that stage and I think you are also not in that stage. In our stage, there is a superior power who different people call by different name and visualise in different forms. When Tryambaka takes one there, then only one knows (or realises).

 

So, pramanas are pramanas, pointers to the truth but not the truth itself. Like an address points to a person but is not the person himself.

 

So, pramanas cannot be belittled because they are VAC, the only 2nd to the truth and only hints to the truth.

 

 

I will repeat. Shrutis are pramanas.

 

 

Though I am no authority of this site, you are welcome to this site.

 

 

Om Namah Sivayya

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

"_________

of course... so if i accept that you see your way, i see my way, another sees his way there's two possibilities:

1-all ways are only in the mind of the wises.. so truth does not exist

2-all ways are there because truth has many aspects (gunas)

so who says that truth is (only)nirguna is actually against "Ekam Sata Vipraha Bahudha Vadanti"..

(how can i choose various ways if they aren't in the supreme?)

_________

If I may intervene here for a moment, the original verses in Yajurveda or Rigveda does not say 'paths'. And paths are not meant either. The word is 'names'.""

 

 

no problems... there's variety in names, because there's variety in qualities..

 

if there's many qualities there's many different possibilities to appreciate god..

 

so we have many paths...

 

if the absolute is unity and not simultaneously variety, only a path is real and others are concoction

[Guest guest]

Mata Durge Sharnam Namah

 

****** 1-all ways are only in the mind of the wises.. so truth does not exist **********

 

Durge tu samjha mujhe. If all ways are in the mind then how truth is inferred not to exist?

 

If I have an address in my mind then the person reffred to by the address does not exist?

 

Durge samjha de mujhko.

 

 

**** 2-all ways are there because truth has many aspects (gunas) ********

 

SB 3.32.28

jnanam ekam paracinair

indriyair brahma nirgunam

avabhaty artha-rupena

bhrantya sabdadi-dharmina

 

 

Ma, Bhagavatam says Brahman is nirgunam. Is Brahman then not true, since it is said to be nirgunam????

 

 

Mata Durge Sharnam Namah

[Guest guest]

"Bhagavatam says Brahman is nirgunam"

--bhagavatam says that the absolute is nirguna and saguna simultaneously. Otherwise why speak of all subtleties of krsna's and vishnu lilas?

 

bhagavat is from the word bhagavan.. the one who possess all opulences, all qualities. For this reason bhagavan is krsna= the all attractive.

[Guest guest]

***** the word bhagavan.. the one who possess all opulences, all qualities. For this reason bhagavan is krsna= the all attractive. ********

 

Can you show some shruti that this really is the definition of bhagavan and not just your opinion?

[Guest guest]

ANAADITWAAN NIRGUNATWAAT PARAMAATMAAYAM

 

 

 

I know that others have simply stopped discussing with you since they sense the futility. Whenever anyone differs with you, you hurl an abuse under the guise of guest name. And you simply do not address the questions.

 

I am also not discussing with you.

 

Lest the initiates think that your view is the only true one, I just place the following information -- not for you but for others.

 

The Truth is apparently modified every second by action of Yogmaya but truly the Truth remains untainted ‘ANAADITWAAN NIRGUNATWAAT PARAMAATMAAYAM AVYAYAH’ (13.32). And that knowledge which sees all beings various entities of distinct kinds as different from one another is asuric.

 

He is truly asuric who spreads the knowledge of diversity being true without upholding the underlying unity as real.

 

 

18.21 Prithaktwena tu yajjnaanam naanaabhaavaan prithagvidhaan;

Vetti sarveshu bhooteshu tajjnaanam viddhi raajasam.

 

18. 21. But that knowledge which sees in all beings various entities of distinct kinds as different from one another—know thou that knowledge to be Rajasic (passionate).

 

 

 

Earlier guest said:

 

***********************

of course... so if i accept that you see your way, i see my way, another sees his way there's two possibilities:

 

1-all ways are only in the mind of the wises.. so truth does not exist

2-all ways are there because truth has many aspects (gunas)

 

so who says that truth is (only)nirguna is actually against "Ekam Sata Vipraha Bahudha Vadanti"..

 

(how can i choose various ways if they aren't in the supreme?)

 

************************

 

 

With respect to the 1st point: If one has an address in memory does that mean that the person or location referred by the address is not true? Stupendous logic.

 

 

In the second guest says: “2-all ways are there because truth has many aspects (gunas)”

 

 

Actually it is not ‘many ways’ but many ‘forms/names’.

 

 

Guest has just ignored "Ekam Sata” The truth is One, Vipraha Bahudha Vadanti: the names/forms are many. A gold bangle is simply a name of a form. A gold ring is simply a name of a form. Gold is the truth, without which names (which are mental) will not exist.

 

 

 

 

The verse does not say ‘Many names/forms of the ONE are the truths’, which guest infers “how can i choose various ways if they aren't in the supreme?” If to reach a person (who is the goal and the truth) there are several roads available, then does the truth become the many roads?

 

 

On the other hand, he says “how can i choose various ways if they aren't in the supreme?” and yet he abuses advaitins as fools. He abuses sages by calling them cheats. If he really believed that the variety are of Lord’s alone then he would be tolerant.

 

 

 

 

Names and forms are ever in flux. If the Truth was these names and forms then The truth will change from moment to moment. Whereas, the truth is ancient, uncuttable, stable, changeless and sanatanah:

 

 

2.24 Acchedyo’yam adaahyo’yam akledyo’shoshya eva cha;

Nityah sarvagatah sthaanur achalo’yam sanaatanah.

 

 

2.24. This Self cannot be cut, burnt, wetted nor dried up. It is eternal, all-pervading, stable, ancient and immovable.

 

 

Then against this verse, which states that Brahman is nirgunam:

 

 

SB 3.32.28

jnanam ekam paracinair

indriyair brahma nirgunam

avabhaty artha-rupena

bhrantya sabdadi-dharmina

 

 

 

The guest said:

 

********

 

-- nirguna and saguna simultaneously. Otherwise why speak of all subtleties of krsna's and vishnu lilas?

 

***************

 

 

He does not mention anything about the SB verse where there is no saguna but he just gives an opinion in a lordly fashion. And if you dare to differ then he will say you a fool or a cheat etc.

 

He is a coward under guest name.

 

Let him give a shruti in support of his opinions.

 

 

 

And let him read these also:

 

 

13.15 Sarvendriyagunaabhaasam sarvendriyavivarjitam; Asaktam sarvabhricchaiva nirgunam gunabhoktru cha.

 

13.15. Shining by the functions of all the senses, yet without the senses; unattached, yet supporting all; devoid of qualities, yet their experiencer,

 

 

PLEASE GIVE ATTENTION TO ‘NIRGUNAM GUNABHOKTRU CHA’: DEVOID OF QUALITIES, YET THEIR EXPERIENCER

 

 

13.32 Anaaditwaan nirgunatwaat paramaatmaayam avyayah; Shareerastho’pi kaunteya na karoti na lipyate.

 

13.32. Being without beginning and devoid of gunas, the Supreme Self, imperishable, though dwelling in the body, O Arjuna, neither acts nor is tainted!

 

ANAADITWAAN NIRGUNATWAAT PARAMAATMAAYAM

 

13.17 Avibhaktam cha bhooteshu vibhaktamiva cha sthitam; Bhootabhartru cha tajjneyam grasishnu prabhavishnu cha.

 

13. 17. And undivided, yet He exists as if divided in beings; He is to be known as the supporter of beings; He devours and He generates also.

 

AND UNDIVIDED, YET HE EXISTS AS IF DIVIDED IN BEINGS

 

 

13.20 Prakritim purusham chaiva viddhyaanaadee ubhaavapi;

Vikaaraamshcha gunaamshchaiva viddhi prakritisambhavaan.

 

13.20. Know thou that Nature and Spirit are beginningless; and know also that all modifications and qualities are born of Nature.

 

ALL MODIFICATIONS AND QUALITIES ARE BORN OF NATURE.

 

13.28 Samam sarveshu bhooteshu tishthantam parameshwaram; Vinashyatswavinashyantam yah pashyati sa pashyati.

 

13.28. He sees, who sees the Supreme Lord, existing equally in all beings, the unperishing within the perishing.

 

 

13.29 Samam pashyan hi sarvatra samavasthitameeshwaram; Na hinastyaatmanaa’tmaanam tato yaati paraam gatim.

 

13.29 . Because he who sees the same Lord dwelling equally everywhere does not destroy the Self by the self, he goes to the highest goal.

13.32 Anaaditwaan nirgunatwaat paramaatmaayam avyayah; Shareerastho’pi kaunteya na karoti na lipyate.

 

13.32. Being without beginning and devoid of gunas, the Supreme Self, imperishable, though dwelling in the body, O Arjuna, neither acts nor is tainted!

ANAADITWAAN NIRGUNATWAAT PARAMAATMAAYAM

Also read

 

Krishna IS NOT SEEN AS HE IS, BEING VEILED BY THE YOGA MAYA.

 

7.25 Naaham prakaashah sarvasya yogamaayaasamaavritah;

Moodho’yam naabhijaanaati loko maamajamavyayam.

 

7.25. I am not manifest to all as I am, being veiled by the Yoga Maya. This deluded world does not know Me, the unborn and imperishable.

 

 

18.20 Sarvabhooteshu yenaikam bhaavamavyayameekshate;

Avibhaktam vibhakteshu tajjnaanam viddhi saattwikam.

 

18.20 That by which one sees the one indestructible Reality in all beings, not separate in all the separate beings—know thou that knowledge to be Sattwic (pure).

 

 

18.21 Prithaktwena tu yajjnaanam naanaabhaavaan prithagvidhaan;

Vetti sarveshu bhooteshu tajjnaanam viddhi raajasam.

 

18. 21. But that knowledge which sees in all beings various entities of distinct kinds as different from one another—know thou that knowledge to be Rajasic (passionate).

 

The truth is that The Truth is apparently modified every second by action of Yogmaya but truly the Truth remains untainted ‘ANAADITWAAN NIRGUNATWAAT PARAMAATMAAYAM AVYAYAH’ (13.32). And that knowledge which sees all beings various entities of distinct kinds as different from one another is asuric.

 

He is truly asuric who spreads the knowledge of diversity being true without upholding the underlying unity as real.

 

 

 

 

Om Namah Sivayya

[Guest guest]

i am not an expert in sanscrit.. but you can search in a dictionary

[Guest guest]

I know that others have simply stopped discussing with you since they sense the futility. Whenever anyone differs with you, you hurl an abuse under the guise of guest name..

--in this way you have insulted me before.. that's very nice, you won!

 

He is truly asuric who spreads the knowledge of diversity being true without upholding the underlying unity as real.

--simultaneous...unity and variety. The absolute is the whole, inside the whole there's everything... To say that something is surface,something else is the core is very strange

 

The verse does not say ‘Many names/forms of the ONE are the truths’, which guest infers “how can i choose various ways if they aren't in the supreme?” If to reach a person (who is the goal and the truth) there are several roads available, then does the truth become the many roads?

--yes... in transcendence the path and the goal, if they really are transcendental are the same, don't you believe in unity?

 

He abuses sages by calling them cheats. If he really believed that the variety are of Lord’s alone then he would be tolerant.

--(non)sages are cheats if they preach that unity is not side to side, at the same level of transcendence, simultaneous to variety...is it difficult?

 

Names and forms are ever in flux.

--that's in the matter,not in transcendence. Why are you speaking of mundane names?

 

Whereas, the truth is ancient, uncuttable, stable, changeless and sanatanah:

--of course you can call truth by these names... go on and add for example "source of all bliss" RAMA, "all attractive" KRSNA, "the one who gives liberation" HARI, "the shelter of poors, desperates" DINANATH, "the chief of devas" SURESHVARA...infinite names are there, no shortage

 

nothing else of what you say demonstrated that truth is only featureless..

 

because truth is nirguna, but simultaneously saguna...... god is absolute,not relative,dualistic

 

you will have more luck with dvaitins, i am not dvaitin, you do not need to demonstrate to me that truth is one, i agree, but you need to understand that truth is not only oneness, but also variety. And both in full transcendence, simultaneity

[Guest guest]

*************

 

--simultaneous...unity and variety. The absolute is the whole, inside the whole there's everything... To say that something is surface,something else is the core is very strange

 

***************

 

 

When you go to the core then you can explain. Before that if you study Mandyuka Upanishad I will be obliged.

 

 

 

 

 

************

The verse does not say ‘Many names/forms of the ONE are the truths’, which guest infers “how can i choose various ways if they aren't in the supreme?” If to reach a person (who is the goal and the truth) there are several roads available, then does the truth become the many roads?

--yes... in transcendence the path and the goal, if they really are transcendental are the same, don't you believe in unity?

 

**************

 

Yes, I believe that in fourth stage it is advaitam Sivam. Fruits are as per your beliefs, which are again as per prior karma. So, you stick to your beliefs of ‘many roads/many names/ many forms’ as eternal truth. I simply am not interested.

 

 

18.20 Sarvabhooteshu yenaikam bhaavamavyayameekshate;

Avibhaktam vibhakteshu tajjnaanam viddhi saattwikam.

 

 

18.20 That by which one sees the one indestructible Reality in all beings, not separate in all the separate beings—know thou that knowledge to be Sattwic (pure).

 

18.21 Prithaktwena tu yajjnaanam naanaabhaavaan prithagvidhaan;

Vetti sarveshu bhooteshu tajjnaanam viddhi raajasam.

 

 

18. 21. But that knowledge which sees in all beings various entities of distinct kinds as different from one another—know thou that knowledge to be Rajasic (passionate).

 

 

 

******* He abuses sages by calling them cheats. If he really believed that the variety are of Lord’s alone then he would be tolerant.

--(non)sages are cheats if they preach that unity is not side to side, at the same level of transcendence, simultaneous to variety...is it difficult? ***********

 

 

 

It is not only difficult it is bad. Actually, frankly I do not want to discuss with you anything. But I will tell you if you have the experience of Samadhi then you may do as you wish. But no, you abuse sages who lived in and out of Samadhi. You abuse those who went into raptures and Samadhi by mere mention of Krishna’s name or by listenting to Siva Mahatmyan.

 

 

It is really surprising why considering ‘many roads/many names/ many forms’ as truths within God, you still abuse others who profess different paths.

 

 

Also, you abuse selectively. If you had called a dvaitin a cheat then I would have considered you as genuine. But you abuse only either advaitins and advaitin sages or certain people professing love for a certain diety.

 

 

 

**************

Whereas, the truth is ancient, uncuttable, stable, changeless and sanatanah:

--of course you can call truth by these names... go on and add for example "source of all bliss" RAMA, "all attractive" KRSNA, "the one who gives liberation" HARI, "the shelter of poors, desperates" DINANATH, "the chief of devas" SURESHVARA...infinite names are there, no shortage

 

************

 

 

Yes one can use names for that nirgunam Brahman. But To go beyond Vac and reach him Upanishads use neti, neti. Since names bind you to certain qualities and Upanishadic teaching is not about bondage but about total liberation.

 

 

This our being compelled to waste time, which should better be used for meditating, is due to attachment to names.

 

 

And I will again point out that you people know only the names that come after creation of the Sun, and not others. That is OK. To see beyond the Sun is the subject of Upanishads. So, you people are allergic to certain names.

 

 

 

****************

nothing else of what you say demonstrated that truth is only featureless..

 

***************

 

On the contrary all verses that I have reproduced show the Supreme to be Nirgunam. ANAADITWAAN NIRGUNATWAAT PARAMAATMAAYAM.

 

 

 

I do not understand your English . I do not understand what you mean by feature. I actually suspect that features of this manifested universe are the features to you. These features, except one, have no permanent value to me.

 

 

 

 

ANAADITWAAN NIRGUNATWAAT PARAMAATMAAYAM. That means PARAMAATMAAYAM is beyond gunas, without gunas, controller of gunas. And gunas means properties or qualities. None of the following verses indicate that there is another kind of Guna other to the Gunas of Prakriti. No shruti indicates that in transcendental realm there are other transcendental gunas.

 

 

If you have any proof of transcendental gunas then bring it. Please do not repeat sentences that you have been repeating for last one and half year without giving a single proof.

 

 

If you cannot give a proof then you go to the fourth state (or Krishna consciousness if you prefer) first and bring us some gunas from there.

 

 

 

Lord says that attachment to gunas is the cause of rebirths and I believe him rather than you.

 

 

SB 3.32.28

jnanam ekam paracinair

indriyair brahma nirgunam

avabhaty artha-rupena

bhrantya sabdadi-dharmina

 

 

BG 13.32 Anaaditwaan nirgunatwaat paramaatmaayam avyayah; Shareerastho’pi kaunteya na karoti na lipyate.

 

13.32. Being without beginning and devoid of gunas, the Supreme Self, imperishable, though dwelling in the body, O Arjuna, neither acts nor is tainted!

 

 

Mandukya Upanishad

 

7. The Fourth is that which is not conscious of the internal world, nor conscious of the external world, nor conscious of both the worlds, nor dense with consciousness, nor simple consciousness, nor unconsciousness, which is unseen, actionless, incomprehensible, uninferable, unthinkable, indescribable, whose proof consists in the identity of the Self (in all states), in which all phenomena come to a cessation, and which is unchanging, sivam, and advaitam, One without a second. That is the Self; that is to be known.

 

11. Prajna seated in the state of deep sleep is m, the third letter (of Om), because of his being the measure or the entity wherein all become absorbed. He who knows thus measures all this and absorbs all.

 

12. That which is without letters (parts) is the Fourth, beyond apprehension through ordinary means, the cessation of the phenomenal world, the Sivam and the advaitam. Thus Om is certainly the Self. He who knows thus enters the Self by the Self.

 

 

 

If you have not yet read Mandukya Upanishad, I wish Lord Krishna impels you towards that soon.

 

 

 

 

*************

because truth is nirguna, but simultaneously saguna...... god is absolute,not relative,dualistic

 

*************

 

 

Please show us a shruti. Don’t just claim. Your idea of saguna is totally based on what you see in materialistic world. Don’t say that you have transcendental experience.

 

 

And these SAguna gods are not there in advaitam sivam – the fourth stage. Only ONE remains.

 

Knowers of Brahman do not admit of a second (Svet. UP.)

 

 

 

But I will tell you. I do not have any experience and I am still arguing, why? Because of attachment to Gunas. Whereas I know discussion with you is entirely fruitless. No new knowledge or wisdom is gained.

 

This is not Brahma Jigyasa based on logic, enquiry, and experience and scriptures, which is auspicious. This is just slugging out ego.

 

 

I do not mean any bad vibes since I truly do not have any. But your ways simply make me want to avoid you.

 

 

 

And just another thing. Read the episode given below:

 

 

MAITRAYANA-BRAHMAYA-UPANISHAD

 

10. The gods and the demons, wishing to know the Self, went into the presence of Brahman (their father, Pragapati). Having bowed before him, they said: ‘O blessed one, we wish to know the Self, do thou tell us.' Then, after having pondered a long while, he thought, these demons are not yet self-subdued; therefore a very different Self was told to them (from what was told to the gods). On that Self these deluded demons take their stand, clinging to it, destroying the true means of salvation (the Veda), preaching untruth. What is untrue they see as true, as in jugglery. Therefore, what is taught in the Vedas, that is true. What is said in the Vedas, on that the wise keep their stand. Therefore let a Brahmana not read what is not of the Veda, or this will be the result.

 

11.(8) Brahman with one foot moves in the three, and Brahman with three feet is in the last.

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

When you go to the core then you can explain

--the dualism core-surface does not affect the spirit

 

So, you stick to your beliefs of ‘many roads/many names/ many forms’ as eternal truth. I simply am not interested.

--that's your problem... one should be interested to the absolute truth.. "atato brahma jignasa"

 

But I will tell you if you have the experience of Samadhi then you may do as you wish.

--i have not experienced any samadhi, and if i had experienced i would not surely revealed in a forum to win a debate with you. The fact is that i believe that in absolute there's also variety and individuality.So there's the possibility to reach the highest goal and simultaneously being available to communicate with others.

 

It is really surprising why considering ‘many roads/many names/ many forms’ as truths within God, you still abuse others who profess different paths.

--many roads,many names,many forms are abused by the one who say that their variety is maya. So it has to be said how they are wrong

 

But you abuse only either advaitins and advaitin sages or certain people professing love for a certain diety.

--you have simply no possibility toanswer and you are going on lieing and insulting..

 

Since names bind you to certain qualities

--that happens in the matter... in the transcendence there's only freedom. So transcendental names are a source of freedom... mantras... mana-traya.. mind's liberation

 

which should better be used for meditating

--meditating is to think intensely to something... krsna says "man mana,mad bhava bhakto...".. "think of me, be my devotee. Being God one with his opulences,names, forms, activities.. if i meditate on god's name, i am meditating on god. Is there something beyond god?

 

And I will again point out that you people know only the names that come after creation of the Sun, and not others

--god is eternal, he is not created, so his names are eternal. If there's names that i do not know (perfectly possible because they're infinite) please tell them to me

 

I actually suspect that features of this manifested universe are the features to you

--you are wrong in your suspect.... i said many times that there's transcendental variety, not only material

 

If you have any proof of transcendental gunas then bring it

--there's plenty of puranas and itihasas with detailed descriptions of transcendental personalities with infinite features. In bhagavad gita god is called krsna and bhagavan ... the all attractive, the one who has all powers.Are'n't they quelities?

 

Lord says that attachment to gunas is the cause of rebirths and I believe him rather than you.

--another cause of rebirth is to think that god's features are like human features.

 

i appreciated your citations but you do not have to fight with me to make me accept that the absolute is nirguna, it is not my problem. You are the one who do not accept that the absolute is perfectly harmonic in being simultaneously oneness and variety.

Aren't you advaitin? Why you discriminate and put oneness in the absolute and variety in the relative?

 

 

[Guest guest]

"bhagavat gita.. the song of bhagavan. Bhagavan is Krishna/Vishnu (decide yourself who's the sourceand who's the expansion, because i do not care.. god is one, both source and expansion are supreme)"

 

wrong: krishna is the supreme personality of godhead, and vishnu is his manifestation / expansion in the mode of cosmic preservation. if you 'do not care', then dont argue.

[Guest guest]

i would put emphasis on the word 'personality', as in he is the avataar of god, not being confined to just vishnu. this is what the gita teaches us. krishna is the human form of the viraat roop. all gods in their respective modes are shown in that true universal form. krishna displays himself as vishnu to arjuna to lend credence to what he had just taught him, as well as because arjuna specifically asked to see his four armed form.

[Guest guest]

"so why are you not following some your philosophy,but you are declaring yourself hindu? Why hindu religion tells lies when speaks about forms and transcendental persons and you are still caring for hinduism?

 

who said i declared myself hindu? last i read was that this is an open forum. and whatsmore, where's the lie? i said we can't be sure. if you are so sure then you'd be surrounded by millions of people for your ability to tell whats happened in the past.

 

"pure means "not polluted".. so why pollute the great message of vedas/itihasas/upanishad/puranas with our poor human speculation believing that our mind is higher than scriptures??"

 

no . sherlock. according to that statement, everything anyone does therefore can be regarded as impure, or corrupt. are you a perfect kshatriya or brahman? do you ever speculate over anything? wait, let me guess, your interpretation of the scripture is absolutely right because you are a self imposed guru. it is best give your OPINION, but dont force YOUR beliefs on others.

 

"understand that the one god has features, charachter, he relationate,he has name, he loves,he can be loved,he has expansions, companions, devotees.... that's god..not some dull concept"

 

and god being beyond simply a krishna avataar is a dull concept? perhaps it is not exciting enough for you? why dont you go to the video store and hire an arnie action movie if it gives you more kicks.