[vedic astrology] What Parasara Advocates...

[Guest guest]

II Hare Rama Krsna II

Dear Arjunji,

If possible, please go to the Sohamsa group and read the complete discussion on the topic. Only a part of it is quoted here in VA. Though I cannot say that I have completely understood the discussion, but it never occured to me as a Shiva-Vishnu debate. It seemed more like - how to interpret Parasara. Also, as Sanjayji prays to both Jagannath and Shiva, I dont see how any such person can possibly take sides.

Regards,

Divya

panditarjun2004 <panditarjun2004 > wrote:

dear friends

 

seems like the old shiva-vishnu confusion is back. for all those

who preach vishnu as the one and only god or his forms of rama,

krishna, jagannath, balaji etc. are the only ones to be worshipped

and their dasavatars only to be reckoned etc., here are the facts

for record.

 

it was lord rudra from whom the three brahma, vishnu and shiva came

in three forms (manifestations) to take up the jobs of creation,

preservation and destruction respectively.

 

once lord vishnu was worshipping lord rudra with 1000 lotus flowers

and due to shiva leela, at the counting of last flower it came only

999. to cover up the shortfall of the last lotus, he plucked his

own eye (rajeeva nayana or netra as vishnu's eyes were equated with

lotus) and put at the feet of lord rudra. of course it was only

shiva leela and vishnu gets back his eye.

 

once brahma and vishnu were debating as to who is the best among the

two. then came rudra in the form of a linga whose size could not be

measured either up in the sky or down in the ground. vishnu goes

downward to measure and brahma goes upward, both fail to touch the

bottom or top. brahma deceives and later get cursed.

 

adi shankaracharya marched by foot from kaladi in kerala to

badarinath in the upper reaches of the himalayas in uttaranchal and

resurrected the badarinath (vishnu) shrine which was in dilapidated

condition then. every one knows that this was the most famous

vishnu shrine built by pandavas after the mahabharat war.

shankaracharya also attained samadhi in badarinath.

 

the message i wish to convey is that all forms of gods and goddesses

are one and there shall be no conflict or confusion in between

them. since each form is assigned to give a particular blessing or

benefit, astrologers including myself suggest worshipping this form

or that form to get a particular benefit but not for dividing the

gods. if the native worships diety "A" we cannot ask him to change

to "B" or "C" or "D" based on ishta, kula etc. let the aradhya

devata whom the native is worshipping continue without discovery of

any ishta or kula or grama or dharma.

 

all indians have the habit of blaming the britishers for

their "DIVIDE AND RULE POLICY" but the same indians divide various

gods and goddesses and say vishnu is better or shiva is better. the

caste system or division of hindus based on four varnas was done by

hindus themselves thousands of years ago and for that also people

blame the britishers.

 

my humble request to all hindus is to believe that god is only one

and all different forms are his manifestations. hence please do not

divide to get ruled by a particular form. having said this, all

paths lead to the same god and whichever form one worships, the

native reaches the same god.

 

with best wishes

pandit arjun

 

vedic astrology, "Narasimha P.V.R. Rao"

<pvr wrote:

>

> Dear Sanjay,

>

> > I have no issue with connecting the third chapter and using

Vishnu's

> > avataras. My only problem is with insisting that only Vishnu's

avataras

> > should be prescribed and, moreover, attributing that view to

Parasara.

> > [s.Rath:] That is because you are not connecting the natural

12th house

> > Pisces which is ruled by Jupiter and natural 9th house also

ruled by Jupiter

> > which indicate the akasa tatva of guru. That is why dharma

devata and ista

> > devata are to be seen in Vishnu. I think you are getting stuck

with

> > forms,names and rasa which is for the beginners and are not

appreciating the

> > sarva-vyapakesa meaning of Vishnu. In another mail today I have

elaborated

> > more on this.

>

> You can write as much as you want. But the bottomline is that

Parasara explicitly mentioned Shiva and Gouri in the context of

ishta devata.

>

> If you do not "get stuck with forms, names" and recognize that

Vishnu is "sarva-vyapakeswara" and hence covers all deities, why

can't you accept Shiva as a form of Vishnu and accept him as ishta

devata?

>

> > Secondly, Parasara did not specifically mention Kaali, but he

did say that

> > Saturn in a malefic sign shows devotion to taamasik deities.

Here Saturn is

> > in Aquarius, a malefic sign.

> > [s.Rath:] Narasimha, are you saying that Kali worship is Tamasik

or that

> > Kali is a tamasika devata? Please think again about this

statement.

>

> Of course, Kaali is referred to as "taamasi" in Sapta shati. She

is of course the taamasik energy of the universe. And, BTW, that is

not a bad thing as some may be tempted to think.

>

> I did not say worshipping Kaali is taamasik.

>

> A personal note here: I used to be prejudiced against taamasik

devatas and used to think that their worship is bad. I later

realized that understanding the nature of taamasik devatas is much

tougher than understanding the nature saattwik devatas and that

sattwik worship of taamasik devatas is possible. I also realized

that moksha is not about being fully saattwik, but about

understanding and overcoming all the three gunas!

>

> > > Should we take Kali to be the deity of the Moon or the deity

of Saturn?

> > > Prasna Marga at least is very clear about Saturn but puts a

condition of

> > the

> > > Moon being in a Saturn's sign.

> >

> > Moon shows Divine Mother in general. Saturn's influence on him

can show a

> > Saturnine form of Divine Mother, i.e. Kaali.

> > [s.Rath:] So, Is it the Moon or Saturn? Which one?

>

> Can be either in my view. Saturn or Moon under Saturnine influence.

>

> > [s.Rath:] Got your point and you have given an excellent

example. But you

> > are still not clarifying one thing. OK I will put the question

differently

> > so that perhaps we can be more clear about what we are talking

about. How

> > many Veda are there - ONE or FOUR?

>

> Veda is the knowledge. There is basically one Veda. For

convenience of learning though, Veda was divided into 3 parts and

later into 4 parts.

>

> May the light of Brahman shine within,

> Narasimha

> -------------------------

> Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net

> Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org

> Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org

> -------------------------

>

>