Is Lord Shiva a demi-god?

[guliaditya]

 

i had enough of this bullshit

shiva and vishnu and bramha are one in the vedas the paramatma is the supreme which is bramha,vishnu,and shiva as well as the shakti's in one.

the vedas say that if a person see's them as seperate and agrue which one is greater they are fools and would never see his face.

why a u agruing about who is better but i guess its the kal yug.

 

people dont make our beautifull culture lik that of christians were roman catholics are fighting the anglicans and they are fighting the rest.

 

come on man we have more important things to do.

 

Vishnu is the controller of maya where as Shiva & brahma are covered under maya. Only by surrendering to Vishnu we can come out of maya otherwise there is no other way.

As far as GOD concept is concerned then Sreeman Narayana is the only GOD.Rest all Devtas are HIS ansh.Lord Shiva is the best among devtas.Lord Shiva is the topmost vaishnava."Vaishnavanam yatha Shambhu" as confirmed by Srimad Bhagavatam.

 

Pranaam

[hindustani]

 

why a u agruing about who is better but i guess its the kal yug.

 

Yes effects are clearly visible here like what I wrote in my 2 posts here.

[guliaditya]

 

Yes effects are clearly visible here like what I wrote in my 2 posts here.

 

Thank you

[Ashok009]

How petty this discussion is, what difference does this make if Shiv is greater or Vishnu...this discussion is an extension on us Indians who are always in awe of the things at the top, including God !!!....so lets see if Vishnu is great and someone worships Shiv then by this logic he would not attain salvation just cause he or she worhiped Shiv, a demi god as some say...how untrue this is...remember Ram said that Shiv is his isht and shiv said Ram is his Isht...even if we dont believe in this, we do agree that shiv is a god, or as some say demi god...still he is God, if nothing he will make sure that brings us closer to God ...his isht that is Vishnu.....what a waste of time on this discussion...

[hindustani]

Yes Ashok and that is why I wrote that this can only happen in Kaliyug,people just try show their "GYAN" and forget some real basics of Hindu religion,they perhaps don't have any idea of how big sean they are doing by saying mine is superior than yours.

[GreatGod Rudra]

Vedas are the only acceptable pramanas. Bhagvatam or any teacher's interpretations cannot be the taken as the true basis. Sri Rudram clearly states...."....namo Girishaye cha Shipivishtaya cha...". Shipivishta means Lord Vishnu. So Lord Vishnu is contained within Lord Shiva. Sri Rudram also states.."namo Rudraya Vishnave mrityurme pahi..." further emphasising this. Vishnusahasranamam or Bhagvatam or Ramayana or Mahabharata cannot be taken as pramanams...just like demi-gods, these are inferior in authority to the Vedas. Even the term "Narayana" means "Leader" and refers to Lord Shiva. For eg. kings are called "Narayan" in Nepal and if you do not know, in Nepal, kings are assumed to be the form of Narayana and worship the Great God Shiva for their people's welfare. And for the uninformed, the common version of Purusha Suktam has been corrupted to include a portion on Vishnua and Lakshmi to make it seem as if the supreme Brahman is Vishnu ! While doing abhisekham for Shiva or Devi, Purusha Suktam is chanted in it's original version without the appendages. Shaivism and Shaktham are the oldest traditions and Vaishnavism is a recent phenomenon after Ramanuja propogated the same. Check history. If you took a count of Hindus and saw how many worship Shiva and how many Vishnu, the truth will become apparent that Vaishnavism is a minority. It is funny to see the infighting within various Vaishnavism sects...ISKON believes Krishna is the Godhead and Vishnu is the avatar of Krishna ! What can be more ridiculous !

 

Indeed, you believe Shiva swallowed hala-hala poison because of Vishnu's bidding and it was Vishnu's good grace that made it possible ?! Ha ha ha!!

 

To call the great God Shiva a demi-god is blashphemy. Awaken and reform.

 

Sri Sadashiva arpanamastu !

[PureIndian]

 

Vedas are the only acceptable pramanas. Bhagvatam or any teacher's interpretations cannot be the taken as the true basis. Sri Rudram clearly states...."....namo Girishaye cha Shipivishtaya cha...". Shipivishta means Lord Vishnu. So Lord Vishnu is contained within Lord Shiva. Sri Rudram also states.."namo Rudraya Vishnave mrityurme pahi..." further emphasising this. Vishnusahasranamam or Bhagvatam or Ramayana or Mahabharata cannot be taken as pramanams...just like demi-gods, these are inferior in authority to the Vedas. Even the term "Narayana" means "Leader" and refers to Lord Shiva. For eg. kings are called "Narayan" in Nepal and if you do not know, in Nepal, kings are assumed to be the form of Narayana and worship the Great God Shiva for their people's welfare. And for the uninformed, the common version of Purusha Suktam has been corrupted to include a portion on Vishnua and Lakshmi to make it seem as if the supreme Brahman is Vishnu ! While doing abhisekham for Shiva or Devi, Purusha Suktam is chanted in it's original version without the appendages. Shaivism and Shaktham are the oldest traditions and Vaishnavism is a recent phenomenon after Ramanuja propogated the same. Check history. If you took a count of Hindus and saw how many worship Shiva and how many Vishnu, the truth will become apparent that Vaishnavism is a minority. It is funny to see the infighting within various Vaishnavism sects...ISKON believes Krishna is the Godhead and Vishnu is the avatar of Krishna ! What can be more ridiculous !

 

Indeed, you believe Shiva swallowed hala-hala poison because of Vishnu's bidding and it was Vishnu's good grace that made it possible ?! Ha ha ha!!

 

To call the great God Shiva a demi-god is blashphemy. Awaken and reform.

 

Sri Sadashiva arpanamastu !

 

What about Swaminarayan?

[Ashok009]

What a waste of timeon this discussion...what does it matter who is bigger and better...they are better than us so both shiv and vishnu are worth worshipping....move on folks and spend time on attaining your spritual goal rather than waste time on this petty discussion

[bhairo]

dont disrespect lord shiva you cannot begin to know lord shiva just remember what happen to daksha when he tried to disrespect shiva.

just because he is quiet and humble people does underestimate the power he has.

[Dark Warrior]

This thread up again? Seriously, give it up dudes.

 

I have no intention to argue any more. For the last time, Hari Sarvottama is enshrined in Vedas. Shiva, Kali, Durga, Skanda, Agni, Vayu, Indra, etc. are simply Jivatmas. Out of these, Shiva is the most powerful of them all. Every Deva, including Vishnu, is called Agni, because they all accept prayer by Sacrifice. Since Sacrifice, ie, Fire is an important medium, each Deva is called Agni. Satapatha Brahmana says Skanda is the son of the Kumara who was born, and this Kumara is hailed as Rudra, Mahadeva, pasupati, Isana, etc. This Kumara is called as sinful, which makes it clear that Rudra is a Jivatma.

 

 

Vedas are the only acceptable pramanas. Bhagvatam or any teacher's interpretations cannot be the taken as the true basis.

 

Absolutely true.

 

 

Sri Rudram clearly states...."....namo Girishaye cha Shipivishtaya cha...". Shipivishta means Lord Vishnu. So Lord Vishnu is contained within Lord Shiva. Sri Rudram also states.."namo Rudraya Vishnave mrityurme pahi..." further emphasising this.

 

In a hymn addressing Vishnu, Rig Veda says, '"Anganyanya devata:...", meaning, 'All these Devas are your Limbs'. This is pure Vishishtadvaita, and explains Hari Sarvottama admirably.

 

Brihadaranyaka Upanishad confirms that Prakrti and Jivas are the body of Brahman, as well.

 

 

It means, every Deva, including Rudra, is part of the body of Vishnu. Just like Nails are part of the Body, but the body can survive without the Nails. However, the Nails cannot survive without the Body and is completely dependent on the Body.

 

So, when the Vedas say, 'Mahadeva is Supreme', here is an analogy. I praise someone by saying, 'You have beautiful nails'. Now here, the nails are being praised as 'beautiful'. But in reality, the praise goes to the person and not just to the nails alone.

 

Similarly, 'Rudra is Supreme', 'Agni is Supreme', etc. means that while the deity is being praised for its prowess, the actual receipient of the praise is Hari, whose body is constituted by these Devas.

 

So, the Sri Rudram first addresses the deity Rudra, as Supreme, who is part of the body of Vishnu (going by the Rig Vedic hymn). That is why Shipivista, ie, Vishnu is addressed here, as the antaryami of Rudra. It does not mean Vishnu is an aspect of Rudra.

 

 

Vishnusahasranamam or Bhagvatam or Ramayana or Mahabharata cannot be taken as pramanams...just like demi-gods, these are inferior in authority to the Vedas.

 

True. However, Vedas provide ample proof.

 

1) The Rig Veda which says all Devas are limbs of Vishnu.

 

2) Satapatha Brahmana, revealing that Rudra is the son of Brahma and a Jivatma. He is called Agni because he was obtained through Tapas (remember, all Devas are Agni because of Sacrifice).

 

3) Eko Narayana asit, na Brahma na Isana, conveys that neither Brahma nor Isa (Shiva) were present during pralaya. Since there are 11 Rudras, the Vedas clarify by calling our Shiva as 'Isana', because that is his name. He obtained the name Shiva only later on.

 

However, Mahanarayana Upanishad clears all doubts. It says that Isana, who has 3 eyes and a trident, was born from Vishnu.

 

4) Purusha Suktam says that the Purusha is the consort of Lakshmi.

 

5) Narayana Suktam clarifies that Narayana is Brahman. He is Brahma, Siva, Indra. However, this isn't absolute identity, but simply, the sarira-sariri/attribute concept again. Brahma, Siva and Indra are the body of Brahman, hence Brahman possesses their attributes. Brahman is Vishnu.

 

6) Sri Madhva gives more proof, with the Ambhrani Sukta and other such things.

 

7) Rig Veda says people do penance to attain position of Maruts, etc. that showing Devas are simply posts. And praise Vishnu as 'He who is not known by even Devas'.

 

8) Rig Veda also says, that Rudra gets his 'Rudratva' power by meditating on Vishnu.

 

9) Yajur Veda calls Rudra as 'Akrura', ie, cruel. Brahman is not cruel. He has no bad qualities. Rig Veda (I believe) also mentions that Rudra worships a deity in the cave of his heart, implying that Rudra has an antaryamin.

 

10) Chandogya Upanishad calls Brahman as 'Pundarikaksha', ie, Lotus Eyed. This is a reference to Vishnu.

 

11) Mahanarayana Upanishad says that the Being on the Ocean is Supreme, and that there is no-one above Him. Guess who? Vishnu, of course.

 

 

 

Even the term "Narayana" means "Leader" and refers to Lord Shiva. For eg. kings are called "Narayan" in Nepal and if you do not know, in Nepal, kings are assumed to be the form of Narayana and worship the Great God Shiva for their people's welfare.

 

Narayana is a proper noun in Veda. Cannot be applied to any deva. All names should apply to Narayana.

 

Is this supposed to be a pramana? 'Kings named Narayana worship Shiva'. Terrific usage, bro.

 

Let me clarify - when you are quoting some vedic verses establishing the supremacy of a deity, you cannot simply pick a few hymns that praise Rudra and claim that Rudra is supreme. For every hymn that praises Rudra, there are thousands that praise Agni, Chandra, Vayu, etc. in the same way. So, one can ask on what basis you select Rudra out of a zillion deities.

 

Hence, the methodology is as follows:

 

- You must never refer to Vedas without understanding the philosophy of the Upanishads. Firstly, the Sarira/Sariri model, ie, devas are body of Brahman, explains how all Devas are praised as limbs of Brahman. Hence, you first need to formulate some philosophy.

 

- Next, you must establish that your deity is different and superior to all other deities. A hymn that compares this deity with the rest is needed. For Vaishnavas, that hymn is 'Of all devas, Agni is lowest and Vishnu is highest' and 'Rudra gets his Rudratva from Vishnu'.

 

- Since even this hymn is explainable in a metaphysical way, one needs further proof. You need to look for some verse describing Brahman and attributing Brahman with some unique mark that establishes your deity as Brahman. Purusha Suktam that says Brahman is consort of Lakshmi, or Mahanarayana Upanishad that says Brahman lies on the ocean, etc. satisfy this condition for Hari Sarvottama.

 

-Then, you need to prove that your deity is extolled in a way that is incomparable with other devas. Although the Rig Veda praises Rudra, Agni, etc. Vishnu is specially mentioned to have no equal, that all devas are His limbs, etc. which establish His supremacy.

 

- You also need to prove that your deity is flawless, and that othe deities have faults. Agni, Vayu, Indra, etc. are described to have ahankara. Rudra has a birth, and is mentioned to be absent during pralaya, etc. (I have described it already).

 

Vishnu has no faults. He is hailed as unborn in the Veda, and as Yagneswara in Satapatha Brahmana.

 

- Lastly, you need to prove that your deity is identical to Narayana, who is the Brahman of the Vedas. By etymological considerations, the name Narayana can only apply to Vishnu.

 

 

 

And for the uninformed, the common version of Purusha Suktam has been corrupted to include a portion on Vishnua and Lakshmi to make it seem as if the supreme Brahman is Vishnu !

 

Proof please? Shaivites make some ridiculous allegations. Purusha Suktam is accepted by all Vedantins to be in pristine form.

 

 

While doing abhisekham for Shiva or Devi, Purusha Suktam is chanted in it's original version without the appendages.

 

As mentioned before, there isn't any Vedantin who HAS NOT quoted Purusha Suktam. And all of them mention that Purusha is Lakshmi pathi.

 

Shaivism was never considered Vedic, even during the time of Adi Sankara. Mordern Shaivite Scholars are actually criticising Shaivites for taking interest in Vedas!!

 

 

 

Shaivism and Shaktham are the oldest traditions and Vaishnavism is a recent phenomenon after Ramanuja propogated the same.

 

First of all, there were many acharyas before Sri Ramanuja. Sri Vaishnavism traces itself to the azhwars. Sri Ramanuja himself names many ancient scholars who followed this system.

 

Secondly, Sri Adi Sankara, who came before Sri Ramanuja, himself was a Vaishnavite. Nowhere has he equated Vishnu to Rudra, as mordern Shaivites claim. In fact, he has even clearly said that Maheshwara is a name of Vishnu in one of his Upanishad bhashyas!!

 

Vaishnavism is Vedanta. Shaivism is against Vedanta. Only two shaivites have ever attempted bhashyas on Vedic texts. These two are Srikantha and Appaya Dikshitar. These two have also been refuted by Vaishnavas. Rest all Vedantins were all Vaishnavas.

 

 

 

If you took a count of Hindus and saw how many worship Shiva and how many Vishnu, the truth will become apparent that Vaishnavism is a minority.

 

If you take a count of how many people follow Islam, and how many follow Hinduism, the truth will become apparent that Islam has a greater following. Does it make it authentic?

 

Argue with sense.

 

 

 

It is funny to see the infighting within various Vaishnavism sects...ISKON believes Krishna is the Godhead and Vishnu is the avatar of Krishna ! What can be more ridiculous !

 

Krishna is Lord of Devas. He is an avatar of Vishnu.

 

 

Indeed, you believe Shiva swallowed hala-hala poison because of Vishnu's bidding and it was Vishnu's good grace that made it possible ?! Ha ha ha!!

 

Padma Purana says Shiva chanted 'Achyuta Ananta Govinda' while drinking the poison.

 

The Devas, despite being Jivatmas, are given many powers. If Shiva is so powerful, it is only because he performed a Yagha to elevate himself to this position. Just because some does miracles, or resurrects, or drinks poison, he doesn't become Supreme.

 

The Rig Veda, I believe, mentions that men can become devas by bathing in Ganga, or something to that effect. Anyone of us can become Rudra or Brahma in another Yuga if we do some penance now. It only represents the desire of Vishnu, Brahman, to share His powers with us. He is after all, compassionate and lovable.

 

Your father or mother is respectable, but you don't call them paramatma. They are jivatmas only. Similarly, respect Rudra and Brahma, as exalted jivas.

 

On this note, I leave.

[Ashok009]

TOTAL WASTE OF TIME, I PITY YOU ON YOUR SMALL THINKING

[Dark Warrior]

I appreciate your pity.

[hindustani]

Dear D.W

 

On this note, I leave.

 

[ranjeetmore]

 

i had enough of this bullshit

shiva and vishnu and bramha are one in the vedas the paramatma is the supreme which is bramha,vishnu,and shiva as well as the shakti's in one.

the vedas say that if a person see's them as seperate and agrue which one is greater they are fools and would never see his face.

why a u agruing about who is better but i guess its the kal yug.

 

people dont make our beautifull culture lik that of christians were roman catholics are fighting the anglicans and they are fighting the rest.

 

come on man we have more important things to do.

 

Ummm,,i'm not sure that this is the real deal....Bhrama samhita,a treatis written by lord bhrama says,"Isvara parama krsna,sacidanand vigraha,anadir aadir govinda,Sarva karana karanam."

The skanda purana,being a scripture for those in the mode of ignorance,obviously gives elaborate description of the magnificent 10 forms of shakti BUT in the end,markandeya Rsi VERY CLEARLY STATES THAT ALL DEMIGODS ARE ENERGIES OF LORD VISHNU AND THAT HE IS THE SOLE PROPREITOR AND MASTER OF ALL THAT BE.

Besides,the vedas were scripted by Srila Vyasadeva.That is common knowledge/.The vedanta is the essence of the entire veda.That too is common knwledge.BUT,Vyasadeva Himself wrote the natural commentary on the vedanta.Now,if any person who thinks that he is at a better position that Dwaipayana Vyasadeva,then he is the biggest fool.So,if we accept the vedanta,accepting it's natural commentary is imperative.What's that commentary? Srimad Bhagvatam.That,sir,answers all the ignorant questions which are generaaly posed by smarta,shaivites,shaktas,mayavadis and God knws what.

[shvu]

 

Ummm,,i'm not sure that this is the real deal....Bhrama samhita,a treatis written by lord bhrama says,"Isvara parama krsna,sacidanand vigraha,anadir aadir govinda,Sarva karana karanam."

 

The Brahma Samhita is a Gauidya text and you really do not want to use it for discussions with non-Gaudiyas. Because it has no value outside that group.

 

 

The skanda purana,being a scripture for those in the mode of ignorance,obviously gives elaborate description of the magnificent 10 forms of shakti BUT in the end,markandeya Rsi VERY CLEARLY STATES THAT ALL DEMIGODS ARE ENERGIES OF LORD VISHNU AND THAT HE IS THE SOLE PROPREITOR AND MASTER OF ALL THAT BE.

 

Which must be wrong for by your own logic, it is a Purana for those in the mode of ignorance! By your own logic, Vishnu is not supreme.

 

 

Besides,the vedas were scripted by Srila Vyasadeva.That is common knowledge/.The vedanta is the essence of the entire veda.That too is common knwledge.BUT,Vyasadeva Himself wrote the natural commentary on the vedanta.Now,if any person who thinks that he is at a better position that Dwaipayana Vyasadeva,then he is the biggest fool.So,if we accept the vedanta,accepting it's natural commentary is imperative.What's that commentary? Srimad Bhagvatam.

 

The Vedas were scripted by Vyasadeva? Ok...

 

He wrote a natural commentary on them? Then why did he not tell this to Shankara and Madhva when they met him? Why have them write more comentaries and further confuse the already confused public?

 

 

That,sir,answers all the ignorant questions which are generally posed by smarta,shaivites,shaktas,mayavadis and God knws what.

 

It is a pity you did not appear on these forums sooner. Else, a lot of these discussions would have been settled a long time ago through your wisdom. Anyway, better late than never!

 

Cheers

[Dark Warrior]

 

Which must be wrong for by your own logic, it is a Purana for those in the mode of ignorance! By your own logic, Vishnu is not supreme

 

No, actually, tamasic and rajasic puranas contain sattvik sections. The Purana as a whole is not an authority, but those sections that agree with what the Vedas say is accepted. For instance, Brahma Vaivarta Purana contains some sections praising Lord Venkatakrishna of Thiruvallikeni, I believe, which is very important for Sri Vaishnavas. A feature of these rajasic and tamasic Puranas is that they are highly inconsistent as far as their content is concerned.

 

The explanation is simply that, Brahma's storytelling may contain inaccuracies (manifested as rajasic and tamasic puranas) but even within the inaccuracies, truth exists. In his sattvik periods, Brahma's storytelling is 100% accurate, and that manifests as the sattvik Puranas.

 

Sri Ramanuja and Sri Madhva too, I believe, quote liberally from Skanda Purana and Linga Purana in their bhashyas. Because portions of these Puranas agree with Shruti. Both of them have mentioned the sloka classifying the Puranas. Sri Sankara, however, has stuck to Vishnu and Padma Puranas.

 

As far as the Bhagavatam is concerned, the theory is that Sri Ramanuja, and for that matter, Sri Sankara as well, did not quote from it because Vishnu Purana focuses more on philosophical details. Bhagavatam presumes that its readers have already accepted some form of philosophy before reading it. Doesn't imply it was non-existent during their times.

 

Purana is not an independent authority, but it is certainly a supplement to the Vedas. The arguments of indologists about recent authorship of Puranas is refuted by the fact that some vedic hymns (like the Rig Veda saying that all devas and worlds aggregated in the navel of the unborn) are not understandable without puranic reference (only after reading the Puranas you can understand that the hymn refers to Vishnu). Its pretty strange that some hymns from an 'older' text like the Veda can be understood only by referring to a 'newer' text like the Purana. Granted, many Puranas are interpolated, but the two primary sattvik Puranas, Vishnu and Bhagavata, have been commentated upon by reliable scholars, and hence, can be accepted as authentic.

 

However, no mention of Puranas should be made until you prove your point with Shruti first.

[ranjeetmore]

 

The Brahma Samhita is a Gauidya text and you really do not want to use it for discussions with non-Gaudiyas. Because it has no value outside that group.

 

 

 

 

 

 

How do you know it is a gaudiya text? Did lord Bhrama mention it to you in one of your previous births that he is writing it for Lord Caitanya???

[ranjeetmore]

 

 

 

 

Which must be wrong for by your own logic, it is a Purana for those in the mode of ignorance! By your own logic, Vishnu is not supreme.

 

 

 

 

Cheers

It's not my logic.It would be rsi Markandeya's logic.A mahatma is a mahatma.Vyasadeva was not some ordinary scholar who would hand duties to mundane intellectual pple.All the rsis were his disciples.

And from wich angle does "my logic" tell you that Lord Vishnu is not supreme?

In sattvic scriptures,it's written he's supreme.In rajasic scriptures it is written He is Paramatma and in Tamasic scriptures also it is written.It's not contradictory,it stresses the fact.

[GreatGod Rudra]

My previous post has mysteriously (?!) disappeared (removed?!)...that proved Vishnu is contained within the Great God Rudra. To conveniently say that Hari is the indweller (!) as counter for every proof presented doesn't impress or convince anyone.

 

In the laghunyasam, prior to chanting Sri Rudram, one has to chant the following verse to state in which part of the body Vishnu is invoked..."padayoh vishnus-tishathu..." ....Enough said.

 

The Narayana Suktam, as the "Purusha Suktam" has been corrupted by vaishnavites to include "...sa shiva" (not part of the original vedic verse) to indicate that Shiva is included within Vishnu...which is obviously far from the truth. Sri Rudram emphatically states that Vishnu is contained within Lord Shiva.

 

Yajur Veda's identity flows from Sri Rudram and the SivaPanchakshara. Among the Vidyas, the Vedas are supreme; in the Vedas, the Sri Rudram is supreme; in the Sri Rudram the Sri Shivapanchakshari Mantram 'NA-MA-SI-VA-YA' is supreme; in the Mantra the two syllabled 'SI-VA' is supreme. As by pouring water at the root of a tree, all its branches are nourished, so also by pleasing Sri Rudra through Rudra Japa, all the Devas are pleased. This is the best atonement (Prayaschittam) for all sins and the foremost 'Sadhana' for attainment of cherished desires. Though Sri Rudram forms part of Karma Kanda, it ranks at par with the Upanishads of the Jnana Kanda and hence is also referred to as “Rudropanishad” and it’s reference is found in glowing terms in the Jabala Upanishad and Kaivalya Upanishad. As it is seen in all the 101 Shakhas or branches of the Yajurveda, it is called 'Satarudriyam'. Satarudriyam is an instrument of Moksha Sadhana in the lore of Upanishads. It is stated “Sarvopanisadam Saro Rudradhyaayam” i.e. “The essence of all Upanishads is Rudropanishat”. In Maha Bharata in Drona Anushasinika parva, the Sata Rudropanishat is very much extolled. When Sage Yagnavalkya was asked by his disciples as to which portion of the Veda conferred most benefits on a devotee on it’s recitation, he referred unhesitatingly to the Sri Rudram. He said “Surapa ssvarnahari Rudra Japi Yati sthatah/ Sahasra Sheersajapica Mucyate Sarva Kilbisaih”. In Jabalopanishat, sage Yajnavalkya stated to the Brahmacharis that by performing Satarudriya Japa and also with homam, one will become immortal. In Kaivalyopanishat it is stated that the person who studies Satarudriyam will be purified by Agni and in Smrutis it is stated that the person who regularly recites will obtain liberation. It is also said that “Prayatah praruthaya ya dadheete vishmpate / Pranjalih Satarudriyam Nashya kin cha na durlabham” . Translated, it means “By constant effort if a person stands facing Lord Surya with folded hands and chants Shata Rudriyam there will be nothing impossible for him.” In Kurmapurana, Lord Krishna under took Pasupata Diksha for one year and smearing ash on his entire body, recited the Sri Rudram. Any one, in any state of life, at any time, recites Satarudriyam daily, will cross the ocean of worldly life or at any time adorned with Bhasma (ash) and with great devotion recites Sri Rudram, will get Jnana (knowledge) by the grace of Lord Shiva. For those desirous of worldly pleasures and for obtaining liberation and purification during repentance there is no refuge other than Shatarudriyam. By reciting Sri Rudram, one will get easily the knowledge of Taraka Brahma Vidya. A verse in the Vayu Purana says:"Chamakam Namakam caiva Purusha Sooktham tathaiva ca / Nityam trayam prayunjano Brahmaloke mahiyate” . Translated, it means “A person reciting daily the Namakam, Chamakam and the Purusha Sooktam is honoured in the Brahma Loka." The Purusha Suktam referred to here is the unadulterated version that recognizes Lord Shiva as the supreme Brahman.

 

"Karanguli nakhothpanna narayana dasakrithi" states the Sri Lalita Sahasranamam, which means "She who created the ten avatharas of Narayana from the tip of her nails". Enough said ? Or would the refutation be that Vishnu Sahasranamam is the only "true" sahasranamam?

 

It took Lord Shiva to explain that taking the name of Lord Rama 3 times is enough for the common man as that is equivalent to chanting the Vishnu Sahasranamam. Is that again, Vishnu speaking through Lord Shiva?

 

Shiva-Shakti is the only truth. The non-recognition of the female principle within the Vaishnava sect is truly amazing.

 

Advaitam is inclusive and liberates the godlike potential within human beings. Vaishnavism is exclusive. Plainly ISKCON is an embarassment to this family as they believe that Vishnu is the avatar of Krishna! ISKCON's founder tried to pitch Hinduism to the world by trying to identify one God that can compete with the one God of Christianity and Islam. And has now caused the raise of this sect that embarasses and makes the Vaishnava family squirm by making it's ridiculous claims ! ISKCON is the idiot-child of the Vaishnava family.

 

Being a smartha, I worship Vishnu too as I do Devi, Ganesha, Surya, Muruga apart from the Great God Rudra. Only praying to Lord Shiva and chanting of the Sri Rudram can grant one moksha, which is the goal of every Hindu. Chanting of the Devi Mahatmyam is equally beneficial, if one has diksha in the Navakshari mantra. The Devi Mahatmyam states clearly that Vishnu's slumber or yoga-nidra is caused and controlled by Shakti !!

 

All the great saints who have saved Hinduism have been worshippers of Lord Shiva and Shakti - be it Adi Shankaracharya rescuing India from Buddhism or Vivekanananda making Indian spiritualism known to the world through his worship of Shiva-Shakti.

 

Fact of the matter is : Vaishnavism is a minority. Like all minorities, they tend to chest beat. May Lord Shiva grant them moksha through his divine grace. By trying to pooh-pooh Lord Shiva, Dark Warrior has taken his name so many times ! Vipirita Bhakti !

 

My respect is for Dark Warrior is only for his extent of reading and knowledge, which he has slanted to brain-wash himself as have his sect's members. I only hope that with time and age, he gets true understanding and knowledge. I am confident, that if he continues seeking true knowledge, he will find that it at the feet of the Great God Rudra.

 

Sri SadasShivaarpanamastu !

[ranjeetmore]

 

 

 

 

The Vedas were scripted by Vyasadeva? Ok...

 

He wrote a natural commentary on them? Then why did he not tell this to Shankara and Madhva when they met him? Why have them write more comentaries and further confuse the already confused public?

 

 

 

 

Cheers

 

 

How should I know why he did not tell Madhva and Shankara bout them.If you know why then plz enlighten us.

HE DID NOT HAVE THEM WRITE COMMENTARIES.

There is a certain collaboration between Bhagvan,His associates and His incarnations.They collaborate,they plot,they execute the actions as we know them,with the agency of Yogmaya.When aadi shankara started the fictitious advait dharma,he did so by first discussing it with his consort as to why he was resorting to trickery.The discussion falls in the tantra sastras.

He says that it is Bhagvan's wish that he start a pro-buddhist religion.

But as you may be aware,he clearly tells his mother on her death bed to practise devotion to Sri krsna.

{And please,just use an honorary term before the usage of the Name,Vishnu,Krsna etc.It is Sri Visnu tattva we are talking about.anandam-Bhram-Yonih DUH}

[GreatGod Rudra]

Also....the Devi Mahatmyam also clearly states that Shakti will come forth again on the Earth as Krishna. The bijakshara for Devi and Krishna are the same.

[ranjeetmore]

 

My previous post has mysteriously (?!) disappeared (removed?!)...that proved Vishnu is contained within the Great God Rudra. To conveniently say that Hari is the indweller (!) as counter for every proof presented doesn't impress or convince anyone.

 

In the laghunyasam, prior to chanting Sri Rudram, one has to chant the following verse to state in which part of the body Vishnu is invoked..."padayoh vishnus-tishathu..." ....Enough said.

 

The Narayana Suktam, as the "Purusha Suktam" has been corrupted by vaishnavites to include "...sa shiva" (not part of the original vedic verse) to indicate that Shiva is included within Vishnu...which is obviously far from the truth. Sri Rudram emphatically states that Vishnu is contained within Lord Shiva.

 

Yajur Veda's identity flows from Sri Rudram and the SivaPanchakshara. Among the Vidyas, the Vedas are supreme; in the Vedas, the Sri Rudram is supreme; in the Sri Rudram the Sri Shivapanchakshari Mantram 'NA-MA-SI-VA-YA' is supreme; in the Mantra the two syllabled 'SI-VA' is supreme. As by pouring water at the root of a tree, all its branches are nourished, so also by pleasing Sri Rudra through Rudra Japa, all the Devas are pleased. This is the best atonement (Prayaschittam) for all sins and the foremost 'Sadhana' for attainment of cherished desires. Though Sri Rudram forms part of Karma Kanda, it ranks at par with the Upanishads of the Jnana Kanda and hence is also referred to as “Rudropanishad” and it’s reference is found in glowing terms in the Jabala Upanishad and Kaivalya Upanishad. As it is seen in all the 101 Shakhas or branches of the Yajurveda, it is called 'Satarudriyam'. Satarudriyam is an instrument of Moksha Sadhana in the lore of Upanishads. It is stated “Sarvopanisadam Saro Rudradhyaayam” i.e. “The essence of all Upanishads is Rudropanishat”. In Maha Bharata in Drona Anushasinika parva, the Sata Rudropanishat is very much extolled. When Sage Yagnavalkya was asked by his disciples as to which portion of the Veda conferred most benefits on a devotee on it’s recitation, he referred unhesitatingly to the Sri Rudram. He said “Surapa ssvarnahari Rudra Japi Yati sthatah/ Sahasra Sheersajapica Mucyate Sarva Kilbisaih”. In Jabalopanishat, sage Yajnavalkya stated to the Brahmacharis that by performing Satarudriya Japa and also with homam, one will become immortal. In Kaivalyopanishat it is stated that the person who studies Satarudriyam will be purified by Agni and in Smrutis it is stated that the person who regularly recites will obtain liberation. It is also said that “Prayatah praruthaya ya dadheete vishmpate / Pranjalih Satarudriyam Nashya kin cha na durlabham” . Translated, it means “By constant effort if a person stands facing Lord Surya with folded hands and chants Shata Rudriyam there will be nothing impossible for him.” In Kurmapurana, Lord Krishna under took Pasupata Diksha for one year and smearing ash on his entire body, recited the Sri Rudram. Any one, in any state of life, at any time, recites Satarudriyam daily, will cross the ocean of worldly life or at any time adorned with Bhasma (ash) and with great devotion recites Sri Rudram, will get Jnana (knowledge) by the grace of Lord Shiva. For those desirous of worldly pleasures and for obtaining liberation and purification during repentance there is no refuge other than Shatarudriyam. By reciting Sri Rudram, one will get easily the knowledge of Taraka Brahma Vidya. A verse in the Vayu Purana says:"Chamakam Namakam caiva Purusha Sooktham tathaiva ca / Nityam trayam prayunjano Brahmaloke mahiyate” . Translated, it means “A person reciting daily the Namakam, Chamakam and the Purusha Sooktam is honoured in the Brahma Loka." The Purusha Suktam referred to here is the unadulterated version that recognizes Lord Shiva as the supreme Brahman.

 

"Karanguli nakhothpanna narayana dasakrithi" states the Sri Lalita Sahasranamam, which means "She who created the ten avatharas of Narayana from the tip of her nails". Enough said ? Or would the refutation be that Vishnu Sahasranamam is the only "true" sahasranamam?

 

It took Lord Shiva to explain that taking the name of Lord Rama 3 times is enough for the common man as that is equivalent to chanting the Vishnu Sahasranamam. Is that again, Vishnu speaking through Lord Shiva?

 

Shiva-Shakti is the only truth. The non-recognition of the female principle within the Vaishnava sect is truly amazing.

 

Advaitam is inclusive and liberates the godlike potential within human beings. Vaishnavism is exclusive. Plainly ISKCON is an embarassment to this family as they believe that Vishnu is the avatar of Krishna! ISKCON's founder tried to pitch Hinduism to the world by trying to identify one God that can compete with the one God of Christianity and Islam. And has now caused the raise of this sect that embarasses and makes the Vaishnava family squirm by making it's ridiculous claims ! ISKCON is the idiot-child of the Vaishnava family.

 

Being a smartha, I worship Vishnu too as I do Devi, Ganesha, Surya, Muruga apart from the Great God Rudra. Only praying to Lord Shiva and chanting of the Sri Rudram can grant one moksha, which is the goal of every Hindu. Chanting of the Devi Mahatmyam is equally beneficial, if one has diksha in the Navakshari mantra. The Devi Mahatmyam states clearly that Vishnu's slumber or yoga-nidra is caused and controlled by Shakti !!

 

All the great saints who have saved Hinduism have been worshippers of Lord Shiva and Shakti - be it Adi Shankaracharya rescuing India from Buddhism or Vivekanananda making Indian spiritualism known to the world through his worship of Shiva-Shakti.

 

Fact of the matter is : Vaishnavism is a minority. Like all minorities, they tend to chest beat. May Lord Shiva grant them moksha through his divine grace. By trying to pooh-pooh Lord Shiva, Dark Warrior has taken his name so many times ! Vipirita Bhakti !

 

My respect is for Dark Warrior is only for his extent of reading and knowledge, which he has slanted to brain-wash himself as have his sect's members. I only hope that with time and age, he gets true understanding and knowledge. I am confident, that if he continues seeking true knowledge, he will find that it at the feet of the Great God Rudra.

 

Sri SadasShivaarpanamastu !

 

HOW DARE YOU DESECRATE THE VEDAS BY SAYING THAT IT HAS BEEN CORRUPTED AND INTERPOLATED.Has the tenets of Smarta tradition filled so much pride in your head that you are getting delusions of self grandeur??

DO NOT

[ranjeetmore]

Vaishnavism is a minority.

Notwithstanding the fact that Sri Shankara has written a 100 word poem describing his transcendental spritual state on remembering sri krsna, and that Vivekananda had taken hookah and meat on his voyage,there are no other saints who classify under your "majority" side of the religion.

Tukaram

Kabeer

Meera

Tulsidas

Guru Nanak

surdas

naamdev

chokhamela

purandar

jeev

rupa

sanatan

gopal bhatta gosvamis

ramanuja[jagadguru]

madhva[jagadguru]

vallabhacharya

Vishnu swami

Nimbarkacharya[jagadguru]

Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu[jagadguru]

Jnyaneshwar

ramdas

Sri Rambhadracharyaji[jagadguru]

Srila Prabhupada[who equals thousands of jagadgurus]

and of course Sant shiromani,Jagadguru Kripaluji maharaj[jagadguru]

 

Minority? Hardly.Millions go every single year to Pandharpur.

Millions visit Jagannath Ratha Yatra.

Millions visit Badrikashram[shankaracharya restored badridham if you recall.]

Countless pple follow these excellent,exalted saints.

How many will walk thousnds of kilometers to honour,say vivekananda's beliefs?

Sorry to awaken you to reality,but the answer is NONE.

Smartas and Mayavadis may have all the discussions in the world.Dry speculation.It just satisfies their egos."Oh yes,I am Bhramn."But they CANNOT GO BEYOND THAT.Because the first step in spiritual realisation is ANTAH KARAN SHUDDHI.Shankara himself proclaimed this to his mother,that the mind CANNOT BE CLEANSED WITHOUT SINGLE MINDED DEVOTION TO HARI.

 

No other saint has had a bigger impact than tulsidas.You may think different,but that's where the problem lies.It's what YOU think.

And do correct me if i am wrong,how many jagadgurus has the smarta tradition produced?

That's right.NONE.

[matarisvan]

 

Vaishnavism is a minority.

Notwithstanding the fact that Sri Shankara has written a 100 word poem describing his transcendental spritual state on remembering sri krsna, and that Vivekananda had taken hookah and meat on his voyage,there are no other saints who classify under your "majority" side of the religion.

Tukaram

Kabeer

Meera

Tulsidas

Guru Nanak

surdas

naamdev

chokhamela

purandar

jeev

rupa

sanatan

gopal bhatta gosvamis

ramanuja[jagadguru]

madhva[jagadguru]

vallabhacharya

Vishnu swami

Nimbarkacharya[jagadguru]

Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu[jagadguru]

Jnyaneshwar

ramdas

Sri Rambhadracharyaji[jagadguru]

Srila Prabhupada[who equals thousands of jagadgurus]

and of course Sant shiromani,Jagadguru Kripaluji maharaj[jagadguru]

 

Minority? Hardly.Millions go every single year to Pandharpur.

Millions visit Jagannath Ratha Yatra.

Millions visit Badrikashram[shankaracharya restored badridham if you recall.]

Countless pple follow these excellent,exalted saints.

How many will walk thousnds of kilometers to honour,say vivekananda's beliefs?

Sorry to awaken you to reality,but the answer is NONE.

Smartas and Mayavadis may have all the discussions in the world.Dry speculation.It just satisfies their egos."Oh yes,I am Bhramn."But they CANNOT GO BEYOND THAT.Because the first step in spiritual realisation is ANTAH KARAN SHUDDHI.Shankara himself proclaimed this to his mother,that the mind CANNOT BE CLEANSED WITHOUT SINGLE MINDED DEVOTION TO HARI.

 

No other saint has had a bigger impact than tulsidas.You may think different,but that's where the problem lies.It's what YOU think.

And do correct me if i am wrong,how many jagadgurus has the smarta tradition produced?

That's right.NONE.

 

ramanujacharya [jagadguru]

prabhupada[1000 jagadgurus]

 

prabhupada is 1000 times better than ramanujacharya? please provide some data to support this. your personal sentiment is not acceptable data.

[GreatGod Rudra]

You must be belonging to the idiot-family.