Vishnu and Shiva (To Robert Koch)

April 26, 2003

Pranaams Robert,

It is always a pleasure to discuss Jyotish and spirituality with you.

> " The religious practice for the Age of Kali is to broadcast the glories of >

the holy name of Krsna. Only for this purpose has the Lord, in a yellow >

color, descended as Lord Sri Caitanya Mahabrabhu." -- Sri Caitanya >

Charitamrta Adi-lila, 3.40

If the purpose of all your quotes was to establish the validity of one path, I

understand and completely agree. If one chose to surrender to Krishna for

moksha, one chose an excellent spiritual path! But, if your purpose was to

question the validity of other paths (e.g. overcoming all the sins and getting

moksha by surrendering to Shiva), I disagree with you.

There are references that establish various paths as the paths suitable for Kali

Yuga. Different schools of Hinduism accept different references and build from

there. I will never question your path, unless you claim that your path is the

only path and other paths are wrong.

For example, Koorma Purana says that Shiva is the deity to be worshipped in Kali

yuga. It says in the 18th chapter:

Brahma krita yuge devastretayam bhagavan Ravih

Dwapare devata Vishnuh Kalau devo Maheswarah

This means that Vishnu was the god to be worshipped in Dwapara yuga and Shiva is

the god for Kali yuga.

Nevertheless I will not claim that only Shiva should be worshipped in Kali yuga.

My only point is that scriptures contain many contradictory references. Each

spiritual path followed in Hinduism has the scriptural sanction. Even as we

follow one religious path, we can be respectful to other paths. That is all I

am asking of those who keep quoting verses on Vishnu's superiority and Shiva's

inferiority.

The religious path one follows is very personal. When it comes to the question

of the ultimate mantra/path for Kali yuga, there are multiple answers in

scriptures. Why don't we be more tolerant and respectful of other paths?

To me, personally, there is nothing more enlightening and satisfying than the

worship of Satya Narayana. Satya Narayana is a form of Narayana, who symbolizes

Truth (satya = truth). Reva khanda in Skanda purana says that Satya Narayana's

worship is highly recommended in Kali yuga, that it helps one overcome all the

sins and vices of Kali yuga and that it finally takes one to Satya loka (the

highest spiritual abode). I started it with specific desires when I had some

problems (my desires were immediately fulfilled), but it became a habit now and

I do it with no desires. On every Full Moon night, I perform a ritual known as

Satya Narayana vratam, which was taught by Vishnu to Narada and by Sage Soota

to Sages Saunaka et al. After praying to Ganesha, Varuna, Pancha loka palakas

(five rulers of the world, symbolizing pancha bhootas), nava grahas (nine

planets) with adhidevatas and pratyadhidevatas and dikpalas (rulers of the ten

directions), we invoke Satya Narayana with hymns from Purusha sookta and pray

to him. All this procedure was explained by Vishnu to Narada and is said to be

the best worship for Kali yuga. No other worship gives me the kind of happiness

that Satya Narayana's worship gives.

BTW, everybody living close to Boston is most welcome to visit my house and be a

guest for the worship. I do it on every Full Moon night. Please send a personal

email to me (at pvr (AT) charter (DOT) net) if you are interested in coming on any Full

Moon night. In May, this worship will take place at my house in South Grafton

on May 15 night. Lord Vishnu identified 3 Full Moons as particularly important

and Vaisakha Pournima is one of them. Moreover, Satya Narayana vratam performed

towards the end of Full Moon will be particularly powerful and we will be

performing the vratam on May 15 night towards the end of Pournimasya. So this

is a particularly important occasion. We will be delighted to have as many

guests as possible and to serve the prasad to them for dinner. If you are

coming, just send me a mail so that we can be prepared. I can give the

directions if you send me an email. We are located 13 miles west-southwest of

the Ashland temple.

Anyway, getting back to the main discussion, my only point is that we have to be

more tolerant of other spiritual paths. Vedas, Upanishats and Puranas are broad

enough to accommodate a multitude of spiritual paths. His Highness

Chandrashekhara Saraswati Swamiji once said,""You don't see the Lotus feet of

the Lord. Why are you fighting over what his face looks like?". Let us not

argue over whether Vishnu is superior or Shiva. Let us instead surrender to Him

and place ourselves at His feet. What difference does it make if we call him

Vishnu or Shiva or Allah? Surrendering at his feet is the main thing!

May Jupiter's light shine on us,

Narasimha

April 26, 2003

Om Vishnave Namah

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Dear Narasimha,

Sahasra Namaskara -

At 03:35 PM 4/26/03 -0400, you wrote:

Pranaams

Robert,

It is always a pleasure to discuss Jyotish and spirituality with

you.

Likewise, Narasimha - it is my pleasure too.

> " The

religious practice for the Age of Kali is to broadcast the glories of

> the holy name of Krsna. Only for this purpose has the Lord, in a

yellow

> color, descended as Lord Sri Caitanya Mahabrabhu." -- Sri

Caitanya

> Charitamrta Adi-lila, 3.40

If the purpose of all your quotes was to

establish the validity of one path, I understand and completely

agree. If one chose to surrender to Krishna for moksha, one chose an

excellent spiritual path! But, if your purpose was to question the

validity of other paths (e.g. overcoming all the sins and getting

moksha by surrendering to Shiva), I disagree with

you.

No, lets just say that all these discussions enable me to enter into the

remembrance of Sri Krsna all the more. That, in fact, was the main

reason for my quoting scriptures and Vedas on this forum and so many

times in our private discussions as well. It is not meant to

belittle Lord Shiva, or other personalities of unfathomable

greatness. My quotations of verses is to resound the

glorification of Krsna that is everywhere in the Vedas, including the

Puranas, Itihasas, Upanishads, as well as Mahabharata.

Glorification of One, does not belittle another, unless it is taken that

way in the mind of the reader. I have no control over the reader's

emotion and disposition when such discussions go on.

There are references

that establish various paths as the paths suitable for Kali Yuga.

Different schools of Hinduism accept different references and build from

there. I will never question your path, unless you claim that your path

is the only path and other paths are wrong.

Paths are one thing, although exclusive surrender and devotion are

entirely another. When Krsna says in the Gita, "Mam ekam

saranam vraja", He requires exclusive, unalloyed surrender.

Similarly, in the Bhagavatam, it is said "bhaktir bhavati

naistiki", meaning the same things. So, people can take

these verses in whichever way they want, but their true import persists

nevertheless. If I say, quoting the Gita, that

"ekam" means only one, exclusive surrender, and someone takes

that to mean that I am diminishing the worship of Shiva, then that is

their interpretation. One has to remove emotion, from the scholarly

subject of the debate. This is all I'm asking for here.

For example, Koorma Purana says that Shiva is

the deity to be worshipped in Kali yuga. It says in the 18th

chapter:

Brahma krita yuge devastretayam bhagavan

Ravih

Dwapare devata Vishnuh Kalau devo

Maheswarah

This means that Vishnu was the god to be

worshipped in Dwapara yuga and Shiva is the god for Kali

yuga.

I am not too familiar with the Kurma Purana, but if that is what it says,

and that is your sraddha, or faith, then that is very good for you.

I do not say that you are wrong, or that I am right. My devotion,

however, leads me to ask that if that is true, then why is it that

the Srimad Bhagavatam, Brhad Naradiya Purana, as well as various

Upanishads, establish that The Supreme Personality of Godhead descends in

this Kali-yuga, in the golden form (Sri Krsna Caitanya Mahaprabhu), and

promotes the Yuga-dharma, i.e. the recitation of the Holy Names of Hari

(Vishnu/Krsna)? Someone also posted a protest, I forget who,

and said that no one path can be exclusively "the only way",

likening Vedic scriptural injunctions to fundamentalism of some

sort. Looking at all of this objectively, a not so learned

outsider would think Hindus are a confused bunch, as one scripture says

one thing, and another Hindu scripture says the opposite

thing. Looking closer, there are specific directives as whom

to worship, when, and in which manner. I am not here to debate

those directives, because thus far people are reacting too emotionally

and subjectively. Thus, for me, simply to broadcast the

transcendental sound vibrations of the maha mantra and scriptural

quotations, benefits me and everybody else who may hear them. When

argument can be an objective matter, then specifics can be ferreted out

through analysis, and understood.

Nevertheless I will

not claim that only Shiva should be worshipped in Kali yuga. My only

point is that scriptures contain many contradictory references. Each

spiritual path followed in Hinduism has the scriptural sanction. Even as

we follow one religious path, we can be respectful to other paths.

That is all I am asking

of those who keep quoting verses on Vishnu's superiority and Shiva's

inferiority.

I never once quoted a verse purporting to state the Lord Shiva was

inferior. I did quote a verse (in a private discussion with you)

from the Bhagavatam in which it is stated that Lord Shiva is the greatest

Vaishnava (Vaishnavanam yatha shambhu), but that does not make him

inferior. Again, it is a matter of the emotional response upon

which these statements are received.

There are many distinctions between different Deities, as well as paths,

given in the Gita and other Vedic scriptures. Differentiation is

just a fact, and cannot be denied. Not to speak of different

Devata, there are even distinctions between that which is obtained by the

recitation of certain Holy Names. For example, Lord Shiva Himself

says the following to his wife Parvati:

Rama rameti rameti rame raame manorame sahasra-namabhis tulyam rama-nama

varanane -- Padma Purana, Uttara-khanda, 72.335 ‘O Varanana (Parvati), ‘I

chant the holy name of Rama, Rama, Rama

and thus enjoy this beautiful sound. This holy name of Ramachandra is

equal to one thousand holy names of Lord Vishnu.'

Then, a further categorization of the Holy Name of Krsna is made, even

though He and Lord Rama are identical:

sahasra-namnam punyanam trir-avrttya tu yat phalam ekavrttya tu krsnasya

namaikam tat prayacchati -- Brahmanda Purana "‘The pious results derived from

chanting the thousand holy

names of Vishnu three times can be attained by only one utterance of the

holy name of Krsna.'

Doing the math, this equates the punya derived from chanting one Name of

Krsna, to that derived from chanting 3 names of Rama.

Further, when in the Bhagavad-gita, Sri Krsna refers to the worship of

various devata as "avipascitah", "alpa-medhasam", and

"Hrta-jnana", i.e. all essentially meaning "less

intelligent, bereft of sense, etc., He is indeed making

differentiations. What we have to understand from all of this, in

the final analysis, is that any kind of worship which is meant for

material gain alone, without a concept of Moksa, i.e. deliverance from

the cycles of births and deaths, is the sport of fools who are bereft of

knowledge. So, certainly if someone worships Lord Shiva with the

intent of attaining spiritual perfection, certainly he or she will attain

that goal. There is no doubt about it.

So, rather than taking offense, and responding emotionally to debate of a

scholarly and transcendent nature, one should purify his or her reason

fro approaching a particular Deity, and then assure that the worship that

follows is for the attainment of Divine consciousness. Regarding

the material requirements of life, these come automatically anyway,

according to one's karma and destiny, and so one does not have to concern

himself with the worship of a Deity for material needs, no more than a

squirrel has to go to the temple to ask God for his daily nuts and

seeds.

The religious path

one follows is very personal. When it comes to the question of the

ultimate mantra/path for Kali yuga, there are multiple answers in

scriptures. Why don't we be more tolerant and respectful of other

paths?

I have no disrespect in the slightest for someone who follows a different

path than I. I will quote Krsna Himself ad infinitum in which

He establishes Himself to Arjuna as the Supreme Personality, even up to

the point of showing the entire universe within His form as the Virata

Purusa. All the devatas up to Lord Shiva, were and continue to be

enshrined within the womb of that universal form, and all those existing

in the past, present, and future as well. To establish that

the numerous Devata and Krsna are one, or in other words

"Abhedam", or the non-dualistic philosophies of the Mayavada

school, is always going to invoke a passionate response from Vaishnava

devotees of Vishnu who believe in the transcendental form of

Godhead.

To wit, you made the statement to me, that "Krsna may not be a real

person." Putting it quite politely, this is an aparadha, or

offense, especially in consideration of the statements of Arjuna who said

"purusam shasvatam divyam", meaning "eternal,

transcendental personality", and "Adi-devam ajam

vibhum", meaning that he existed before all other devatas, is unborn

and primeval, and "param brahma", meaning that not only is He

the source of various Devata, but He is also the source of Brahman, or

Brahmajyoti itself. To imply thus that He is "not really a

person" is not only ludicrous, but walking a fine line between

scholarly debate and aparadha. Finally, to insist, as someone else

did on this list quoting Caitanya Charitamrta, that Sri Caitanya

Mahaprabhu came to preach Mayavada philosophy, is the height of folly,

especially in consideration of the words of Sri Caitanya Himself who said

"mayavadi bhasya sunile haya sarva nasa", i.e. "even if

one hears Mayavada philosophy, his understanding is forever

doomed."

Anyway, so offense can be taken on either side. Yes, I can

understand why Shiva bhaktas may feel anger or dismay if their Deity is

not seen in the same light as they. Then again, the response may

not be commensurate to the intent of the original statement, and thus all

I can say is, that one needs to humbly continue with their devotions,

pray to Lord Shiva for guidance, and remember the words of Sri Krsna in

the Gita, "Tams titiksasva bharata", i.e. try to tolerate

without being disturbed (Bg 2.14).

To me, personally, there is nothing more

enlightening and satisfying than the worship of Satya Narayana.

BTW,

everybody living close to Boston is most welcome to visit my house and be

a guest for the worship.

If I lived in the Boston area, I would indeed love to visit and partake

of the Satya-Narayana vrata with you, Narasimha.

Anyway, getting back

to the main discussion, my only point is that we have to be more tolerant

of other spiritual paths. Vedas, Upanishats and Puranas are broad enough

to accommodate a multitude of spiritual paths. His Highness

Chandrashekhara Saraswati Swamiji once said,""You don't see the

Lotus feet of the Lord. Why are you fighting over what his face looks

like?". Let us not argue over whether Vishnu is superior or Shiva.

Let us instead surrender to Him and place ourselves at His feet. What

difference does it make if we call him Vishnu or Shiva or Allah?

Surrendering at his feet is the main thing!

Very good then, and I am in agreement. Hare Krsna!

With best regards,

Om Tat Sat

Robert

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Robert A. Koch, Vedic Astrologer

Faculty Member, SJC and ACVA

visit

<http://www.robertkoch.com>

and,

http://www.jyotishdiscovery.com

or

Ph: 541.318.0248

April 26, 2003

Dear Robert Prabhu

Please accept my humble obeisances

All glories to Srila Prabhupada

Your brilliant writings do not go unnoticedKeep illuminating.....

As far as I have understood there is the Rudra sampradaya which is the bonafide

connection to Lord Siva the GREATEST Vaishnava.

I am one that believes that all paths do not lead to the same goal. Surely to

gain a relationship with Sri Krishna some how or other you must attract and

please Sri Krishna. The secret is to please his pure devotee. This is my goal

in spiritual life. But it may not be everyones....

Your pitiable servant

Kasim

>"Robert A. Koch"

>vedic astrology >vedic astrology

>Re: [vedic astrology] Re: Vishnu and Shiva (To Robert Koch) >Date:

Sat, 26 Apr 2003 14:30:09 -0700 > >Om Vishnave Namah >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > >Dear

Narasimha, > >Sahasra Namaskara - > >At 03:35 PM 4/26/03 -0400, you wrote:

>>Pranaams Robert, >> >>It is always a pleasure to discuss Jyotish and

spirituality with >>you. > >Likewise, Narasimha - it is my pleasure too. > >> >

" The religious practice for the Age of Kali is to broadcast the >>glories of >>

> the holy name of Krsna. Only for this purpose has the Lord, in a >>yellow >> >

color, descended as Lord Sri Caitanya Mahabrabhu." -- Sri >>Caitanya >> >

Charitamrta Adi-lila, 3.40 >> >>If the purpose of all your quotes was to

establish the validity of >>one path, I understand and completely agree. If one

chose to >>surrender to Krishna for moksha, one chose an excellent spiritual

>>path! But, if your purpose was to question the validity of other >>paths

(e.g. overcoming all the sins and getting moksha by >>surrendering to Shiva), I

disagree with you. > >No, lets just say that all these discussions enable me to

enter into >the remembrance of Sri Krsna all the more. That, in fact, was the

>main reason for my quoting scriptures and Vedas on this forum and so >many

times in our private discussions as well. It is not meant to >belittle Lord

Shiva, or other personalities of unfathomable >greatness. My quotations of

verses is to resound the glorification >of Krsna that is everywhere in the

Vedas, including the Puranas, >Itihasas, Upanishads, as well as Mahabharata.

Glorification of One, >does not belittle another, unless it is taken that way

in the mind >of the reader. I have no control over the reader's emotion and

>disposition when such discussions go on. > >>There are references that

establish various paths as the paths >>suitable for Kali Yuga. Different

schools of Hinduism accept >>different references and build from there. I will

never question >>your path, unless you claim that your path is the only path

and >>other paths are wrong. > >Paths are one thing, although exclusive

surrender and devotion are >entirely another. When Krsna says in the Gita, "Mam

ekam saranam >vraja", He requires exclusive, unalloyed surrender. Similarly, in

>the Bhagavatam, it is said "bhaktir bhavati naistiki", meaning the >same

things. So, people can take these verses in whichever way >they want, but their

true import persists nevertheless. If I say, >quoting the Gita, that "ekam"

means only one, exclusive surrender, >and someone takes that to mean that I am

diminishing the worship of >Shiva, then that is their interpretation. One has

to remove >emotion, from the scholarly subject of the debate. This is all I'm

>asking for here. > >>For example, Koorma Purana says that Shiva is the deity

to be >>worshipped in Kali yuga. It says in the 18th chapter: >> >>Brahma krita

yuge devastretayam bhagavan Ravih >>Dwapare devata Vishnuh Kalau devo Maheswarah

>> >>This means that Vishnu was the god to be worshipped in Dwapara yuga >>and

Shiva is the god for Kali yuga. > >I am not too familiar with the Kurma Purana,

but if that is what it >says, and that is your sraddha, or faith, then that is

very good for >you. I do not say that you are wrong, or that I am right. My

>devotion, however, leads me to ask that if that is true, then why >is it that

the Srimad Bhagavatam, Brhad Naradiya Purana, as well as >various Upanishads,

establish that The Supreme Personality of >Godhead descends in this Kali-yuga,

in the golden form (Sri Krsna >Caitanya Mahaprabhu), and promotes the

Yuga-dharma, i.e. the >recitation of the Holy Names of Hari (Vishnu/Krsna)?

Someone also >posted a protest, I forget who, and said that no one path can be

>exclusively "the only way", likening Vedic scriptural injunctions to

>fundamentalism of some sort. Looking at all of this objectively, a >not so

learned outsider would think Hindus are a confused bunch, as >one scripture

says one thing, and another Hindu scripture says the >opposite thing. Looking

closer, there are specific directives as >whom to worship, when, and in which

manner. I am not here to debate >those directives, because thus far people are

reacting too >emotionally and subjectively. Thus, for me, simply to broadcast

the >transcendental sound vibrations of the maha mantra and scriptural

>quotations, benefits me and everybody else who may hear them. When >argument

can be an objective matter, then specifics can be ferreted >out through

analysis, and understood. > >>Nevertheless I will not claim that only Shiva

should be worshipped >>in Kali yuga. My only point is that scriptures contain

many >>contradictory references. Each spiritual path followed in Hinduism >>has

the scriptural sanction. Even as we follow one religious path, >>we can be

respectful to other paths. That is all I am asking of >>those who keep quoting

verses on Vishnu's superiority and Shiva's >>inferiority. > >I never once

quoted a verse purporting to state the Lord Shiva was >inferior. I did quote a

verse (in a private discussion with you) >from the Bhagavatam in which it is

stated that Lord Shiva is the >greatest Vaishnava (Vaishnavanam yatha shambhu),

but that does not >make him inferior. Again, it is a matter of the emotional

response >upon which these statements are received. > >There are many

distinctions between different Deities, as well as >paths, given in the Gita

and other Vedic scriptures. >Differentiation is just a fact, and cannot be

denied. Not to speak >of different Devata, there are even distinctions between

that which >is obtained by the recitation of certain Holy Names. For example,

>Lord Shiva Himself says the following to his wife Parvati: >Rama rameti rameti

>rame raame manorame >sahasra-namabhis tulyam >rama-nama varanane -- Padma

Purana, Uttara-khanda, 72.335 >'O Varanana (Parvati), 'I chant the holy name of

Rama, Rama, Rama >and thus enjoy this beautiful sound. This holy name of

Ramachandra >is equal to one thousand holy names of Lord Vishnu.' > >Then, a

further categorization of the Holy Name of Krsna is made, >even though He and

Lord Rama are identical: >sahasra-namnam punyanam >trir-avrttya tu yat phalam

>ekavrttya tu krsnasya >namaikam tat prayacchati -- Brahmanda Purana >"'The

pious results derived from chanting the thousand holy names of >Vishnu three

times can be attained by only one utterance of the holy >name of Krsna.' >

>Doing the math, this equates the punya derived from chanting one >Name of

Krsna, to that derived from chanting 3 names of Rama. > >Further, when in the

Bhagavad-gita, Sri Krsna refers to the worship >of various devata as

"avipascitah", "alpa-medhasam", and >"Hrta-jnana", i.e. all essentially meaning

"less intelligent, bereft >of sense, etc., He is indeed making differentiations.

What we have >to understand from all of this, in the final analysis, is that any

>kind of worship which is meant for material gain alone, without a >concept of

Moksa, i.e. deliverance from the cycles of births and >deaths, is the sport of

fools who are bereft of knowledge. So, >certainly if someone worships Lord

Shiva with the intent of >attaining spiritual perfection, certainly he or she

will attain that >goal. There is no doubt about it. > >So, rather than taking

offense, and responding emotionally to debate >of a scholarly and transcendent

nature, one should purify his or her >reason fro approaching a particular

Deity, and then assure that the >worship that follows is for the attainment of

Divine consciousness. >Regarding the material requirements of life, these come

>automatically anyway, according to one's karma and destiny, and so >one does

not have to concern himself with the worship of a Deity for >material needs, no

more than a squirrel has to go to the temple to >ask God for his daily nuts and

seeds. > >>The religious path one follows is very personal. When it comes to

>>the question of the ultimate mantra/path for Kali yuga, there are >>multiple

answers in scriptures. Why don't we be more tolerant and >>respectful of other

paths? > >I have no disrespect in the slightest for someone who follows a

>different path than I. I will quote Krsna Himself ad infinitum in >which He

establishes Himself to Arjuna as the Supreme Personality, >even up to the point

of showing the entire universe within His form >as the Virata Purusa. All the

devatas up to Lord Shiva, were and >continue to be enshrined within the womb of

that universal form, and >all those existing in the past, present, and future as

well. To >establish that the numerous Devata and Krsna are one, or in other

>words "Abhedam", or the non-dualistic philosophies of the Mayavada >school, is

always going to invoke a passionate response from >Vaishnava devotees of Vishnu

who believe in the transcendental form >of Godhead. > >To wit, you made the

statement to me, that "Krsna may not be a real >person." Putting it quite

politely, this is an aparadha, or >offense, especially in consideration of the

statements of Arjuna who >said "purusam shasvatam divyam", meaning "eternal,

transcendental >personality", and "Adi-devam ajam vibhum", meaning that he

existed >before all other devatas, is unborn and primeval, and "param >brahma",

meaning that not only is He the source of various Devata, >but He is also the

source of Brahman, or Brahmajyoti itself. To >imply thus that He is "not really

a person" is not only ludicrous, >but walking a fine line between scholarly

debate and aparadha. >Finally, to insist, as someone else did on this list

quoting >Caitanya Charitamrta, that Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu came to preach

>Mayavada philosophy, is the height of folly, especially in >consideration of

the words of Sri Caitanya Himself who said >"mayavadi bhasya sunile haya sarva

nasa", i.e. "even if one hears >Mayavada philosophy, his understanding is

forever doomed." > >Anyway, so offense can be taken on either side. Yes, I can

>understand why Shiva bhaktas may feel anger or dismay if their Deity >is not

seen in the same light as they. Then again, the response may >not be

commensurate to the intent of the original statement, and >thus all I can say

is, that one needs to humbly continue with their >devotions, pray to Lord Shiva

for guidance, and remember the words >of Sri Krsna in the Gita, "Tams titiksasva

bharata", i.e. try to >tolerate without being disturbed (Bg 2.14). > > To me,

personally, there is nothing more enlightening and >satisfying than the worship

of Satya Narayana. >> BTW, everybody living close to Boston is most welcome to

visit my >>house and be a guest for the worship. > >If I lived in the Boston

area, I would indeed love to visit and >partake of the Satya-Narayana vrata

with you, Narasimha. > >>Anyway, getting back to the main discussion, my only

point is that >>we have to be more tolerant of other spiritual paths. Vedas,

>>Upanishats and Puranas are broad enough to accommodate a multitude >>of

spiritual paths. His Highness Chandrashekhara Saraswati Swamiji >>once

said,""You don't see the Lotus feet of the Lord. Why are you >>fighting over

what his face looks like?". Let us not argue over >>whether Vishnu is superior

or Shiva. Let us instead surrender to >>Him and place ourselves at His feet.

What difference does it make >>if we call him Vishnu or Shiva or Allah?

Surrendering at his feet >>is the main thing! > >Very good then, and I am in

agreement. Hare Krsna! > >With best regards, >Om Tat Sat > >Robert > >

>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >Robert A. Koch, Vedic Astrologer >Faculty

Member, SJC and ACVA >visit and, >http://www.jyotishdiscovery.com or >Ph:

541.318.0248 Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.

April 26, 2003

Namaste Robert,

> i.e. the recitation of the Holy Names of Hari (Vishnu/Krsna)? Someone > also

posted a protest, I forget who, and said that no one path can be > exclusively

"the only way", likening Vedic scriptural injunctions to > fundamentalism of

some sort. Looking at all of this objectively, a not so > learned outsider

would think Hindus are a confused bunch, as one scripture > says one thing, and

another Hindu scripture says the opposite > thing.

Hindus in general are not confused. Most Hindus are comfortable with the

apparent contradictions. And, we don't care about how a "not so learned

outsider" would view us. Embracing some scriptural quotes quite literally and

dismissing other scriptural quotes completely may be one arbitrary way of

resolving the contradictions, but most Hindus have a more balanced picture

where the apparent contradiction is transformed to a subtle and self-consistent

higher Truth.

> I never once quoted a verse purporting to state the Lord Shiva was > inferior.

Who said it was you? Others did. Go back and read the archives. My criticism was never aimed at you.

> I did quote a verse (in a private discussion with you) from the > Bhagavatam

in which it is stated that Lord Shiva is the greatest Vaishnava > (Vaishnavanam

yatha shambhu), but that does not make him inferior.

And, it goes vice versa, i.e. Lord Vishnu is the greatest devotee of Shiva and

received a lot of knowledge and boons from Shiva.

> 'O Varanana (Parvati), 'I chant the holy name of Rama, Rama, Rama and thus >

enjoy this beautiful sound. This holy name of Ramachandra is equal to one >

thousand holy names of Lord Vishnu.'> > "'The pious results derived from

chanting the thousand holy names of Vishnu > three times can be attained by

only one utterance of the holy name of Krsna.'> > Doing the math, this equates

the punya derived from chanting one Name of > Krsna, to that derived from

chanting 3 names of Rama.

OK, how about another math just based on first paragraph above?

Vishnu's 1000 names include "Rama". So value of the name Rama + value of other

999 names = value of the name Rama. This implies the value of other 999 names

is zero. These 999 names whose combined value is zero contain the name Krishna

also. So the value of the name "Krishna" is zero.

Gee, isn't kind of math is quite silly?

Bottomline: Don't do math on Lord's names! ;-)

[Note: For the serious readers, I have a comment. The equation x+y=x normally

implies that y=x-x=0. That's what I took above. However, if x is infinity, then

x-x is not zero and y is indeterminate. But then, 3 times x is not necessarily

greater than x. If x is infinity, you cannot compare x and 3x. Both are

infinite and there ends the matter. See, it all goes back to my original

analogy and comments - applying finite thinking to infinity...]

> I have no disrespect in the slightest for someone who follows a different >

path than I. I will quote Krsna Himself ad infinitum in which He >

establishes Himself to Arjuna as the Supreme Personality, even up to the >

point of showing the entire universe within His form as the Virata > Purusa.

All the devatas up to Lord Shiva, were and continue to be > enshrined within

the womb of that universal form, and all those existing in > the past, present,

and future as well. To establish that the numerous > Devata and Krsna are one,

or in other words "Abhedam", or the non-dualistic > philosophies of the Mayavada

school, is always going to invoke a passionate > response from Vaishnava

devotees of Vishnu who believe in the > transcendental form of Godhead.

Yes, Krishna showed his viraat roopa to Arjuna, which contained Shiva and

others. But then, Shiva also showed his virat roopa to Brahma and Vishnu in

which they saw themselves and the whole universe.

Look, I am not being emotional. I am only trying to factor in the scriptures

that you left out. And, that changes the picture! ;-)

As I wrote in the original mail, all the following are mentioned in various scriptures:

Vishnu is superior to Shiva. Shiva is superior to Vishnu. Vishnu came from

Shiva. Shiva came from Vishnu. Vishnu worshipped Shiva and got his blessings.

Shiva worshipped Vishnu and got his blessings. Vishnu is a superset of Shiva.

Shiva is a superset of Vishnu.

Again, it goes back to my main point about applying finite thinking to infinity...

And, don't tell me about making a "not so learned outsider" think that Hindus

are confused. We care about the Absolute Truth more than what others think of

us.

> To wit, you made the statement to me, that "Krsna may not be a real >

person." Putting it quite politely, this is an aparadha, or offense, >

especially in consideration of the statements of Arjuna who said "purusam

Please don't misquote me out of context. I was talking about Krishna's statement

"people of limited intelligence think that I am just this particular person. But

I am not just this person. Everything and everybody in this universe is me". I

never said Krishna might not be not a real person.

> Anyway, so offense can be taken on either side. Yes, I can understand why >

Shiva bhaktas may feel anger or dismay if their Deity is not seen in the > same

light as they. Then again, the response may not be commensurate to > the intent

of the original statement,

I have to respectfully draw your attention to the difference. No Shiva devotee

has disturbed this list by giving quotes from Shiva Purana and Linga Purana

about Shiva's superiority when Vishnu's worship was being recommended. On the

other hand, when Shiva's worship through Chamakam was being recommended, some

Vishnu devotees started giving quotes about Vishnu's superiority and putting a

lot of caveats on Shiva's worship. Shiva's devotees only responded to the

diatribe to set the record straight. They never launched a diatribe first.

Diatribes against a deity by those who read only a few scriptures and ignore the

others are not welcome on this list (again, Robert, this warning is not meant

for you).

> >His Highness Chandrashekhara Saraswati Swamiji once said,""You don't see >

>the Lotus feet of the Lord. Why are you fighting over what his face looks >

>like?". Let us not argue over whether Vishnu is superior or Shiva. Let us >

>instead surrender to Him and place ourselves at His feet. What difference >

>does it make if we call him Vishnu or Shiva or Allah? Surrendering at his >

>feet is the main thing!> > Very good then, and I am in agreement. Hare Krsna!

I am glad!

A word as the administrator: When the milky ocean was churned, first poison came

out and then came nectar. I am honestly not so concerned about wasting a few

posts on this topic related to spirituality. When we talk about remedial

measures in astrology, this topic will keep coming up again. To have a little

bit heated discussion and to bridge the gap between various groups a little

bit, there cannot be a better time than right now, based on the planetary

positions!

May God bless all with wisdom, compassion, open-mindedness and devotion!

May Jupiter's light shine on us,

Narasimha

April 27, 2003

dear sri. narasimhaji,

i am putting my comments to this not to have any contradictions but to appreciate what u said.

-

Narasimha P.V.R. Rao

vedic astrology

Sunday, April 27, 2003 5:30 AM

[vedic astrology] Re: Vishnu and Shiva (To Robert Koch)