Guest guest Posted August 21, 2004 Report Share Posted August 21, 2004 In Prabhupada's literature we are told that Shiva is not a living entity in the same way demigods like Brahma and Indra are. Rather he is a transformation of Krsna like milk into curd. Wouldn't this in fact make him the most powerful demigod bar Vishnu, (obviously because He is Krsna)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 22, 2004 Report Share Posted August 22, 2004 achintya, wade onthenet <wadeonthenet> wrote: > In Prabhupada's literature we are told that Shiva is > not a living entity in the same way demigods like > Brahma and Indra are. Rather he is a transformation of > Krsna like milk into curd. Wouldn't this in fact make > him the most powerful demigod bar Vishnu, (obviously > because He is Krsna)? To get the best answer to the question, it would be wise to frame the question more explicitly. What exactly is meant by "demigod?" Srila Prabhupada uses this word to translate "deva," although even "deva" can mean any celestial being including Krishna (for example, in bhagavad-giitaa He is referred to as deve deve jagat-pate). I think your question is really this: is Shiva a jiivaatmaa? Or is he the supreme Brahman? Or is he in some third category that is neither of the prior two? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 23, 2004 Report Share Posted August 23, 2004 krishna_susarla <krishna_susarla wrote: >I think your question is really this: is Shiva a jiivaatmaa? Or is he >the supreme Brahman? Or is he in some third category that is neither >of the prior two? Hare Krishna, I think we went through this topic some time earlier. This topic is dealt by Srila Rupa Goswami in Laghu Bhagavatamrita and Srila Viswanatha Chakravarthi Thakura in Madhurya Kadambini. Srila Rupa Goswami analyses thus : Siva appears in eleven forms and eight forms. Generally he has ten arms and five heads, with three eyes on each head. The scriptures explain that, as Brahma is, so Siva is sometimes a jiva soul and sometimes an amsa-avatara like Lord Sesa. Because He is an incarnation of the Personality of Godhead, He is generally beyond the modes of material nature. However, because he is touched by the mode of ignorance, He is thought to be affected by it. This is described in Srimad-Bhagavatam (10.88.3): "Lord Siva is always associated with the three modes of nature." He is described in Brahma-samhita (5.45): "Just as milk is transformed into curd by the actions of acids, but yet the effect curd is neither the same as, nor different from, its cause, viz., milk, so I adore the primeval Lord Govinda of whom the state of Sambu is a transformation for the performance of the work of destruction."** Sometimes He is born from Brahma's forehead and other times from Visnu's forehead. At the kalpa's end He is born from Lord Sankarsana as the fire of time. Siva's form named Sadasiva, who is a direct expansion of the Personality of Godhead, is the cause of all causes, is free from the slightest scent of the mode of ignorance, and resides in Sivaloka, is described in the Vayu Purana and other scriptures. He, is the original form of Lord Siva, is described in Brahma-samhita (5.8): "Rama-devi, the spiritual (cit) potency, beloved consort of the Supreme Lord, is the regulatrix of all entities. The divine plenary portion of Krsna creates the mundane world. At creation there appears a divine halo of the nature of His own subjective portion (svamsa). This halo is divine Sambhu (Sadasiva), the masculine symbol or manifested emblem of the Supreme Lord. This halo is the dim twilight reflection of the supreme eternal effulgence. This masculine symbol is the subjective portion of divinity who functions as progenitor of the mundane world, subject to the supreme regulatrix (niyati). The conceiving potency in regard to mundane creation makes her appearance out of the supreme regulatrix. She is Maya, the limited, non-absolute (apara) potency, the symbol of mundane feminine productivity. The intercourse of these two brings forth the faculty of perverted cognition, the reflection of the seed of the procreative desire of the Supreme Lord."** Srila Viswanatha analyses as follows: Now we'll consider the second aparadha of misunderstanding the position of Vishnu, Shiva and demigods. Conscious beings (chaitanya) are of two types: independent and dependent. The independent being is the all-pervading Lord (ishvara), and the dependent beings are the particles of consciousness (jivas), energies of the Lord, who only pervade individual bodies. Ishvara chaitanya is of two types: one is not touched at all by maya, and the other, for the Lord's pastimes, accepts the touch of maya. The first type of ishvara is called by such names as Narayana, Hari, etc.: harir hi nirgunah saksat purusah prakrteh parah It is Hari who is directly the non-material Lord transcendental to material nature. (SB 10.88.5) The second type of ishvara is called by such names as Shiva. sivah sakti-yutah sasvat tri- lingo guna-samvrtah Shiva voluntarily accepts the three gunas and appears to be covered by them. (SB 10.88.3) Though Shiva appears to be covered by the gunas, one should not think that he is in the category of jiva for Brahma-samhita says: ksaram yatha dadhi vikara- visesa-yogat sanjayate na hi tatah prthag asti hetoh yah sambhutam api tatha samupaiti karyad govindam adi-purusam tam aham bhajami Shiva is a transformation of the Lord, just as yogurt is a transformation of milk. (Brahma-samhita 5.45) In the puranas and other scriptures as well, Shiva is glorified as ishvara. In the Bhagavatam it is said: sattvam rajas tama iti prakrter gunas tair yuktah parah purusa eka ihasya dhatte stity-adaye hari-virinci-hareti samjnah sreyamsi tatra khalu sattva-tanor nrnam syuh The transcendental Personality of Godhead is indirectly associated with the three modes of material nature, namely goodness, passion, and ignorance, and just for the material world's creation, maintenance and destruction He accepts the three qualitative forms of Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva. Of these three, all human beings can derive ultimate benefit from Vishnu. (SB 1.2.23) In this sloka it is also generally understood that Brahma may also be considered as ishvara. But Brahma's position as ishvara or lord should be understood as power invested in a jiva by the Supreme Lord (ishvara-avesha) bhasvan yathasma-sakalesu nijesu tejah svayam kiyat prakatayaty api tadvad atra brahma ya esa jagad-anda-vidhana-karta govindam adi-purusam tam aham bhajami By the bestowal of power by the Supreme Lord, Brahma is able to create the universe, just as the sun manifests a portion of its own light in effulgent gems like suryakanta, etc. (Brahma-samhita 5.49) parthivad daruno dhumas tasmad agnis trayamayah tamasas tu rajas tasmat sattvam yad brahma-darsanam Wood is a transformation of earth, but smoke is better than wood. Fire is still better, for by it we can perform yajna. Similarly, passion (rajas) is better than ignorance (tamas), but goodness (sattva) is best because by it one can come to realize the Truth. (SB 1.2.24) Though the mode of passion is superior to ignorance, still as in smoke one cannot perceive fire, in in smoke-like raja-guna, the fire-like effulgent Lord cannot be realized. In the fire-like mode of goodness one can perceive the pure effulgence of the Lord almost like a direct realization. As fire, though present within wood, cannot be perceived, so in the mode of ignorance, the Lord though present, is not directly manifest. Just like even in deep dreamless sleep (susupti), the characteristic of tama guna, one experiences a happiness almost similar to the happiness of realization of the Lord in His impersonal aspect (<BI>nirbheda jnana sukha). Considering the tattvas in this way, we can understand the conclusions. The conscious beings who are dependent on the Lord, jivas, are of two types: those who are not covered by ignorance and those who are covered, devatas, men and animals. The uncovered jivas are of two types: those under the influence of the Lord's aishvarya shakti, and those uninfluenced by that shakti. Those not influenced by the Lord's aishvarya shakti are broadly two types: those practicing jnana who merge into the Lord (a lamentable condition), and those practicing bhakti who remain differentiated from the Lord and taste nectarean bliss (a non-lamentable state). Those who are influenced by the aishvarya shakti are of two types: those absorbed in jnana belonging to the spiritual sphere (eg. the Four Kumaras), and those absorbed in the functions of creation, etc. of the material sphere (Brahma, etc). Thus one may consider that Vishnu and Shiva are non-different, being the same ishvara chaitanya. A devotee who is without material motivation (nishkama) must discern who is worthy of worship or not on the basis of nirguna and saguna, that is, with no material qualities (Vishnu) and with a touch of material qualities (Shiva, Brahma, etc.). Being different types of chaitanya, Brahma and Vishnu are completely distinct, Brahma is jiva and Vishnu is ishvara. Sometimes, Brahma and Vishnu are described as identical in the Puranas. One should, however, understand this statement by the example of the sun (Vishnu) and the jewel suryakanta (Brahma) which is invested with the light of the sun. Suryakanta is like a magnifying glass which takes the rays of the sun and manifests the heat of the sun by burning paper, etc. In this way only, Brahma is considered non-different. In some mahakalpas, even Shiva is a jiva like Brahma invested with power by the Lord: kvacij java visesatvam harasyoktam vidher iveti As in Brahma's case, sometimes a particular jiva takes the role of Shiva. Thus, Shiva is sometimes classed with Brahma in such statements as: yas tu narayanam devam brahma rudradi daivataih samat venaiva manyeta sa pasanha bhaved dhruvam A person who considers Narayana as equivalent to Brahma, Shiva and the other devatas is a low rascal. (Hari Bhakti Vilasa 1.73) Those who have not thoroughly researched in the matter say that Vishnu is the Lord, not Shiva; or that Shiva is the Lord, not Vishnu. That since I am a devotee of Vishnu, I will not give regard to Shiva, or visa versa. Such people, deliberately involving themselves in such arguments, also commit nama aparadha. If such offenders can become enlightened by a devotee with thorough knowledge of the matter, then they can realize in what way Shiva and Vishnu are non-different. With this realization, and by performing nama kirtana, the person can nullify his offense. Hope it was helpful. Dasa Narasimhan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 23, 2004 Report Share Posted August 23, 2004 http://vedabase.net/cc/madhya/20/en1 CC Madhya 20.308: "Rudra, Lord Siva, has various forms, which are transformations brought about by association with maya. Although Rudra is not on a level with the jiva-tattvas, he still cannot be considered a personal expansion of Lord Krishna CC Madhya 20.311: "Lord Siva is an associate of the external energy; therefore he is absorbed in the material quality of darkness. Lord >>>Vishnu is transcendental to maya and the qualities of maya<<<. Therefore He is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. http://vedabase.net/cc/adi/2/89/en1 purprt ....According to Srila Jiva Gosvami, sambhos tu tamo-'dhishthanatvat kajjalamaya-sukshma-dipa-sikha-sthaniyasya na tatha samyam: "The sambhu-tattva, or the principle of Lord Siva, is like a lamp covered with carbon because of his being in charge of the mode of ignorance. The illumination from such a lamp is very minute. Therefore the power of Lord Siva cannot compare to that of the Vishnu principle." http://members.tripod.com/~gauranga1/sri_bhagavata mrita_kanika_svct.zip ....During some kalpas very pious jivas attain this position whereas in others, Lord Visnu Himself accepts the position of Lord Siva. However, the personality of Sadasiva, is a plenary portion (vilas-vigraha: as distinct from svamsa expansions which are endowed with a smaller degree of potency from the original Godhead) of the self-same form of the Supreme Lord, Sri Krsna, and He is transcendental to the three modes of material nature. It is from Him that the gunavatar of Siva is expanded. Therefore He should be understood to be superior to Brahma, equal to Lord Visnu, and entirely separate from jivas, who are influenced by the material modes of nature --- another translation: --- http://opensourcescriptures.com/bhagavatamritakana/ atha tamo-guNena zivaH saMhAra-kartA | sthUla-vairAja-saMjJaH sUkSma-hiraNyagarbha-saMjJaH sRSTi-kartA padmodbhava Izvara eva, kvacit kalpe jIvaz ca kvacit kalpe viSNur api | kiM ca sadA-zivaH svayaM-rUpAGga-vizeSa-svarUpo nirguNaH saH zivasyAMzI | ataevAsya brahmato'py AdhikyaM viSNunA sAmyaM ca jIvAt tu saguNatve'sAmyaM ca ||6|| Then, with tamo-guna (quality of darkness), Shiva is the cause of destruction. In a gross form, the creator born from the lotus of the Lord is known as Vairaja, and in a subtle form he is known as Hiranyagarbha. In some cosmic eras he is a living entity, and in some cosmic eras he is Vishnu. Also, Sada-shiva is a distinct form of a portion of svayam-rupa, and Shiva is his portion. Therefore, he is superior than Brahma, equal with Vishnu, and different from the living entities who are subject to the qualities of nature Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.