Lord Shiva as Paramatma?

[Murali_Mohan_das]

Last night, as I was observing my significant other's "Kali form", a novel (for me) thought came into my mind.

 

Is it only Sri Vishnu/Krishna Who is residing in the heart of every living entity as Paramatma, or do *all* the Personalities of Godhead have a place there as well?

[HerServant]

Every person-ality of the Lord is revealed to devotees in Nama Rupa. In this revelation too is the devotees real identity, i.e. relationship with the Lord. So if the Lord grants Shiva nama rupa revelation you will also understand yourself (self realization) in relationship.

 

Each Person of the Lord is unique, i.e. simultaneously one and different with other forms. So to is each devotee God given realization of His form. Specifically, that there will simultaneous and oneness difference of the Lord in His revealed form and the devotee's realization of himself in relationship with Him.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

I guess a mystical question deserves a mystical reply.

 

In my laziness, I was looking for a simple yes/no answer and maybe some scriptural citation. Sounds like you're answering "yes". Thank you.

 

 

Every person-ality of the Lord is revealed to devotees in Nama Rupa. In this revelation too is the devotees real identity, i.e. relationship with the Lord. So if the Lord grants Shiva nama rupa revelation you will also understand yourself (self realization) in relationship.

 

Each Person of the Lord is unique, i.e. simultaneously one and different with other forms. So to is each devotee God given realization of His form. Specifically, that there will simultaneous and oneness difference of the Lord in His revealed form and the devotee's realization of himself in relationship with Him.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

Let me explain my thinking a little more.

 

The mother of my kids was nicknamed "Durga" by the Brahmacharis (if memory serves) during her stay at the Math in Navadvipa.

 

Last night, my "current significant other" displayed a rather stunning form which I liken to Goddess Kali.

 

When scripture says that we are not really the "doers" of our actions, does that mean that, when we do something "destructive" or "transformational", it is actually Lord Shiva as Paramatma which is behind this action?

 

Maybe I'm treading on thin ice here...

[HerServant]

[krishnadasa]

I encountered a mystique few years back , who uised to say that he could see all demigod in his heart, he worships Lord Ganesha ardently though..Everyone is indidual soul and has a different relation with the supreme lord, one gets according to one's relation with the lord...

[theist]

Well...? Paramatma is Krsna's expansion not Lord Siva's. There is only one Supreme Personality of Godhead.

 

It would be more proper to say that Lord Shiva is Paramatma's(Krsna's) expansion for carrying out destruction.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

 

Well...? Paramatma is Krsna's expansion not Lord Siva's. There is only one Supreme Personality of Godhead.

 

Thanks for the clarification. Is this explicitly stated in scripture? I could do some research, but I presume, given your intense interest in Paramatma, that you have a better sense of where to look.

 

From my memory, the Lord says He is present in the heart of all, but I don't recall seeing anything stating specifically that Paramatma is the Lord's (Supreme) Personality of Sri Krishna.

[theist]

Just read Bhagavad-gita.

[Beggar]

Upon proper meditation, the axiom, "subjective evolution of consciousness" presented by Srila Sridhar Maharaja answers all these questions. Perhaps another one of his axioms to add in is, "there is gradation, everywhere." Once when Bhargava was bombarding Sridhar Maharaja with questions one after the other, he was severly chastised. Maharaja said, "I am not a question and answer machine". Then after a moments pause and reflection he said, "it is a system. If you can understand the system then you can answer all these questions yourself".

[Guruvani]

I posted a reference from Srimad Bhagavatam some time back where it does describe Lord Siva as being the Supersoul.

I will have to dig around again in the Vedabase to find it.

 

Lord Siva is all-pervasive and knows everyone's heart just like the Supersoul.

 

As far as that goes Radha and Laxmi are also all-pervasive and for that reason they are sometimes referred to as Vishnu tattva.

 

I don't know if all-powerful goes along with all-pervasive.

I don't think so.

That is the shaktiman that is all-powerful even though the shakti is all-pervasive.

[Guruvani]

Lord Brahma has referred to Lord Siva as the Paramatma.

 

 

S. B., Chapter Six Brahma Satisfies Lord Siva

 

TEXT 46 <!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]-->

 

<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]-->

na vai satam tvac-caranarpitatmanam

bhutesu sarvesv abhipasyatam tava

bhutani catmany aprthag-didrksatam

prayena roso 'bhibhaved yatha pasum

<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]-->

SYNONYMS

<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]-->

na--not; vai--but; satam--of the devotees; tvat-carana-arpita-atmanam--of those who are completely surrendered at your lotus feet; bhutesu--among living entities; sarvesu--all varieties; abhipasyatam--perfectly seeing; tava--your; bhutani--living entities; ca--and; atmani--in the Supreme; aprthak--nondifferent; didrksatam--those who see like that; prayena--almost always; rosah--anger; abhibhavet--takes place; yatha--exactly like; pasum--the animals.

<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]-->

TRANSLATION

<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]-->

My dear Lord, devotees who have fully dedicated their lives unto your lotus feet certainly observe your presence as Paramatma in each and every being, and as such they do not differentiate between one living being and another. Such persons treat all living entities equally. They never become overwhelmed by anger like animals, who can see nothing without differentiation.

 

[Murali_Mohan_das]

 

Lord Brahma has referred to Lord Siva as the Paramatma.

 

Very interesting. Thank you. I was not aware of that passage in Srimad Bhagavatam.

 

I will try to follow theist's advice as well and re-read Sri Sri Bhagavad Gita.

[Ganeshprasad]

Pranam

Krishna tu Bhagvan swayam, to deny that would be like cutting the nose to spite the face, Ista Deva, Some see Bhagvan as Shiva, and yet another as Devi and some see as Brahman one without a second. All shadhak see god through their respective Shastra. Demigods have no place in Vedic dharma, devas yes and they are all worthy of our worship.

SB 8.7.21: The prajāpatis said: O greatest of all devas, Mahādeva, Supersoul of all living entities and cause of their happiness and prosperity, we have come to the shelter of your lotus feet. Now please save us from this fiery poison, which is spreading all over the three worlds.

 

BG

vayur yamo 'gnir varunah sasankah

prajapatis tvam prapitamahas ca

namo namas te 'stu sahasra-krtvah

punas ca bhuyo 'pi namo namas te

 

You are Vaayu, Yama, Agni, Varuna, Shashaanka, and Brahmaa as well as the father of Brahmaa. Salutations to You a thousand times, and again and again salutations to You. (11.39)B

 

 

 

 

And the Vedas confirms above

"They call him Indra, Mitra, Varuna, Agni, and he is heavenly nobly-winged Garutman.

To what is One, sages give many a title they call it Agni, Yama, Matarisvan." RV (Book 1, Hymn 164.46)

It is absurd to think expansions and the different forms of one supreme lord as separated and different. As if the supreme Brahman could be fragmented, the mind boggles

Jai Shree Krishna

[indulekhadasi]

 

Well...? Paramatma is Krsna's expansion not Lord Siva's. There is only one Supreme Personality of Godhead.

 

It would be more proper to say that Lord Shiva is Paramatma's(Krsna's) expansion for carrying out destruction.

 

Hare Krishna. You are right but it goes even a step further. Lord Shiva is Paramatma's expansion and Lord Shiva's expansion is Rudra who is in charge of destruction. Sadashiva in the spiritual world is beyond all that stuff. Sadashiva is not capable of dying but Rudra, whose residence is below the Viraja river, must die just like Brahma must die.

[shvu]

 

Hare Krishna. You are right but it goes even a step further. Lord Shiva is Paramatma's expansion and Lord Shiva's expansion is Rudra who is in charge of destruction. Sadashiva in the spiritual world is beyond all that stuff. Sadashiva is not capable of dying but Rudra, whose residence is below the Viraja river, must die just like Brahma must die.

 

Since the word expansion is being bandied around a lot here, can someone please mention the sanskrit word that got translated to expansion?

 

Cheers

[theist]

 

"They call him Indra, Mitra, Varuna, Agni, and he is heavenly nobly-winged Garutman.

To what is One, sages give many a title they call it Agni, Yama, Matarisvan." RV (Book 1, Hymn 164.46)

 

 

"It". Thanks but no thanks.

[indulekhadasi]

 

Since the word expansion is being bandied around a lot here, can someone please mention the sanskrit word that got translated to expansion?

 

Cheers

 

expansion-kala

[Ganeshprasad]

Pranam

 

 

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=12 width=624 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=center bgColor=#ffffff height=52>"They call him Indra, Mitra, Varuna, Agni, and he is heavenly nobly-winged Garutman.

To what is One, sages give many a title they call it Agni, Yama, Matarisvan." RV (Book 1, Hymn 164.46)

 

 

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

"It". Thanks but no thanks.

 

 

If this is only the objection I withdraw the verse (although the Vedas are infallible) but then I suspect you find any excuse to reject rest of the argument put forward.

Bhagvat the amala puran in this verse 8.7.21 is very clear about who the parmatma is don’t you think? And Bhagvat gita verse 11.39 do I see any argument?

 

Jai Shree Krishna

[theist]

Simply put I reject all commentaries that refer to the Supreme Person as an "it". You have the right to put forward such an idea and I have the right to reject it. Simple.

 

The rest of the argument from such a contaminated source holds no interest to me for further consideration. Just my personal approach to the matter.

[Ganeshprasad]

 

Simply put I reject all commentaries that refer to the Supreme Person as an "it". You have the right to put forward such an idea and I have the right to reject it. Simple.

 

The rest of the argument from such a contaminated source holds no interest to me for further consideration. Just my personal approach to the matter.

 

Wow what a cop-out, this has nothing to do with my right or your rejection,

No Acharya would reject rig Veda the verse I provided has no commentary if you fill the translation is wrong I am happy to consider it, I only provided that verse to support the Verse from Bhagvat Gita. In any case I was happy to withdraw it.

 

If you consider Bagvat puran and Bhagvat Gita as contaminated sourse, then there is nothing further to say and if you think the translation I have provided is wrong then bring the ones you have, just don’t hide behind your personal approach but then that is your choice.

 

Jai Shree Krishna

[theist]

 

Wow what a cop-out, this has nothing to do with my right or your rejection,

No Acharya would reject rig Veda the verse I provided has no commentary if you fill the translation is wrong I am happy to consider it, I only provided that verse to support the Verse from Bhagvat Gita. In any case I was happy to withdraw it.

 

If you consider Bagvat puran and Bhagvat Gita as contaminated sourse, then there is nothing further to say and if you think the translation I have provided is wrong then bring the ones you have, just don’t hide behind your personal approach but then that is your choice.

 

Jai Shree Krishna

 

You sure are overly sensitive. I am no sanskrit scholar who can pick over word meanings rejecting this part and accepting that part. As a simple unlettered man I find it best for me to reject any referrence to the Supreme Lord as an it. Why is that so hard for you to understand and accept? I did not ask you to withdraw any thing you posted I just expressed my opinion.

 

The Bhagvata gita and Bhagvata Purana both are translated by personalists schools and impersonalists schools. They reach different conclusions as to the summum bonum of the souls's existence and they are not all one. So I am cautious.

[Ganeshprasad]

 

You sure are overly sensitive. I am no sanskrit scholar who can pick over word meanings rejecting this part and accepting that part. As a simple unlettered man I find it best for me to reject any referrence to the Supreme Lord as an it. Why is that so hard for you to understand and accept? I did not ask you to withdraw any thing you posted I just expressed my opinion.

 

The Bhagvata gita and Bhagvata Purana both are translated by personalists schools and impersonalists schools. They reach different conclusions as to the summum bonum of the souls's existence and they are not all one. So I am cautious.

 

 

Be cautious all you like and I be sensitive when I see misrepresentation or ridiculing the source I provided. Be objective study both the sloka from your own source and refute it if you can

 

This thread has nothing to do with personalists or impersonalists schools. It is about Lord Shiva as Paramatma? In case you forgotten.

 

I had provided Rigved verse in support of Bhagvat Gita slok 11.39 which clearly indicates the Lord is known by those many names.

 

And the Bhagvat slok is actualy supporting the thread in question.

 

SB 8.7.21: The prajāpatis said: O greatest of all devas, Mahādeva, Supersoul of all living entities and cause of their happiness and prosperity, we have come to the shelter of your lotus feet. Now please save us from this fiery poison, which is spreading all over the three worlds.

 

So if you can refute both do so but don’t try deflect the truth, (for want of use of the word ‘it’) it was not presented to reflect impersonalist view.

 

Jai Shree Krishna

[Kulapavana]

 

Hare Krishna. You are right but it goes even a step further. Lord Shiva is Paramatma's expansion and Lord Shiva's expansion is Rudra who is in charge of destruction. Sadashiva in the spiritual world is beyond all that stuff. Sadashiva is not capable of dying but Rudra, whose residence is below the Viraja river, must die just like Brahma must die.

 

well, well, well... Lord Krsna must die too when He appears in this world, so does Lord Ramacandra, is it not? What does that tell you, my dear?

 

Lord Shiva is very often completely misunderstood by the Vaishnavas, especially the Western ones. They consider Lord Shiva to be a mere demigod. How bogus is that?

[sevabhakta]

To some, Lord Shiva is believed to be the source of Paramatma, as they consider him to be the supreme personality of the Godhead, and Shiva accepts that mode of worship.