Is Lord Shiva a demi-god?

[Amlesh]

May be I'll get know something out of your fightings.

 

See, it's true, fighting between 2 makes the 3rd happy.

[Ashok009]

MY HUMBLE QUESTION TO ALL THESE VERY VERY SMART, INTELLIGIENT, WELL READ PEOPLE - HOW MANY OF YOU HAVE SEEN GOD. CAUSE FOR U PEOPLE FEELING IS ALSO NOT ENOUGH AS THAT COULD BE MAYA, SO MY QUESTION IS HOW MANY OF YOU HAVE SEEN GOD. AND IF ANYONE OF YOU HAS SEEN OR MEET HIM REGULARLY THEN PLEASE ASK HIM THE QUESTION WE ARE DEBATING ON. AND THEN LET US KNOW YOUR ANSWER. OH AND BY THE WAY I WANT PROOF OF YOUR MEETING HIM LIKE MAYBE A SIGNED NOTE FROM HIM OR MAYBE A PHOTO OR EVEN A STATEMENT FROM HIM TO SAY THAT HE MET YOU...BUT THEN AGAIN THAT STATEMENT WILL NOT HOLD GOOD AS IT SHOULD BE NOTARIZED....HMMMMM LET ME SEE.....NOTARY IS NOT ENOUGH EITHER THE JUDGE SHOULD SIGN THAT ON A COURT ORDER.....NOT ENOUGH FOR ME.......MAYBE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SHOULD COME AND VISIT ME IN MY HOME TO VALIDATE THE TRUTH....WELL LETS CUT TO THE CHASE....GOD SHOULD COME TO MY HOME, WELL I AM VERY BUSY SO PLS ASK HIM TO MAKE AN APPOINTMENT TO COME AND SEE ME AND THEN HE SHOULD TELL ME WHAT HE TOLD U.....ONLY THEN WILL I BELIEVE......BUT THEN THE GOD WHO VISITS ME SHOULD PROVE THAT HE IS THE GREATEST AND THE TOP MOST GOD.....BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY CAN YOUR PEA SIZED BRIAN HANDLE THE LOGIC OF THE PARMATAMA WHO CREATED EVERYTHING.........I DOUBT THAT....THEN AGAIN IF U FEEL YOUR BRAIN IS OVERDEVELOPED PLEASE GET A CERTIFICATION FROM A WELL KNOW DOCTOR.................................

[Amlesh]

 

MY HUMBLE QUESTION TO ALL THESE VERY VERY SMART, INTELLIGIENT, WELL READ PEOPLE - HOW MANY OF YOU HAVE SEEN GOD. CAUSE FOR U PEOPLE FEELING IS ALSO NOT ENOUGH AS THAT COULD BE MAYA, SO MY QUESTION IS HOW MANY OF YOU HAVE SEEN GOD. AND IF ANYONE OF YOU HAS SEEN OR MEET HIM REGULARLY THEN PLEASE ASK HIM THE QUESTION WE ARE DEBATING ON. AND THEN LET US KNOW YOUR ANSWER. OH AND BY THE WAY I WANT PROOF OF YOUR MEETING HIM LIKE MAYBE A SIGNED NOTE FROM HIM OR MAYBE A PHOTO OR EVEN A STATEMENT FROM HIM TO SAY THAT HE MET YOU...BUT THEN AGAIN THAT STATEMENT WILL NOT HOLD GOOD AS IT SHOULD BE NOTARIZED....HMMMMM LET ME SEE.....NOTARY IS NOT ENOUGH EITHER THE JUDGE SHOULD SIGN THAT ON A COURT ORDER.....NOT ENOUGH FOR ME.......MAYBE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SHOULD COME AND VISIT ME IN MY HOME TO VALIDATE THE TRUTH....WELL LETS CUT TO THE CHASE....GOD SHOULD COME TO MY HOME, WELL I AM VERY BUSY SO PLS ASK HIM TO MAKE AN APPOINTMENT TO COME AND SEE ME AND THEN HE SHOULD TELL ME WHAT HE TOLD U.....ONLY THEN WILL I BELIEVE......BUT THEN THE GOD WHO VISITS ME SHOULD PROVE THAT HE IS THE GREATEST AND THE TOP MOST GOD.....BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY CAN YOUR PEA SIZED BRIAN HANDLE THE LOGIC OF THE PARMATAMA WHO CREATED EVERYTHING.........I DOUBT THAT....THEN AGAIN IF U FEEL YOUR BRAIN IS OVERDEVELOPED PLEASE GET A CERTIFICATION FROM A WELL KNOW DOCTOR.................................

 

Thanks Ashok. That's what, those who doubt needs proof.

 

I already have a small glimpse of Him, my only desire is to work for Him now.

[ranjeetmore]

ashok,that is so naive.

God is Sat.chit.ananda.

He is pure chit.How can u photograph Him ?

As 4 pple who hav seen Him.There are billions throughout history.Go to vraja,many commune with God on a daily basis.You cant see God with Your present eyes.They are material,made of the 5 elements.How can u see a pure,spiritual entity with these faulty senses...i personaly havent seen God,bt i follow shabda pramana of mahapurush..They are God realised..you can ask them....and no,they wont tel you that God is niraakar,(if this is wat ur expecting as an answer).People who think God is formless are less intelligent.They feel form is inherent in the material creation and has no existence beyond it.But there can be a spiritual form just like there is a material form.The vedas state that the material creation is a reflection of the spiritual sky(paravyoma),just like mayadevi is a reflection of Ramadevi,the superexcellent,internal potency of Godhead.

[ranjeetmore]

darkwarrior,u confuse rudra with shiva.Thats naive.

[Ashok009]

Ranjeetmore u seem to know it all and all plausible explantions to this sorry discussion...i think u totally missed my point here .....everyone is asking for proof here on this discussion...some quote scriptures, which is someone elses thoughts and other quote other people....still someone else thoughts....none of your own experience......and dear friend god does not have any form....u think that an entity like god can be bound togther in form....can he be contained in any form....is there a form that will be enough for him........the answer is no......he is beyond form...he only manifests in forms that we understand and can relate to.......and by the way u can only feel God....or sense him through your own experience....u should talk about your experienec not what some one else tells u ....it is like tasting food in our mouth...same dish will evoke a different reaction to different people.....differenet level of readiness ....i think these simple dicsussions are too deep for people who do not have the depth and neither they have the willingness to dwell in deeper....god resides in all of us.....just need to feel him ,hear him and experinece him..........

[Dark Warrior]

 

Dear Dark warrior,

Freud's theory , and Akbar-birbal stories , are not irrelevent for explaining human behaviour. They are very pertnant to throw light on how people behave. I am only using them to throw light on what is happening to the quality of the discussion in this so called spiritual forum. Rather than declaring my line of argument irrelevent show me with your rational argument how this is irrelevent and not applicasble to the behaviour of people in this forum. Geting angry is hardly the way of a discussion. Argue out your case man.

 

That's very nice, but unfortunately, no Vedantin has ever mentioned Freud's theories on human psychology as pramana. Stick to the discussion, which is basically about what Vedas teach.

 

Vaishnavas have proven that Vishnu is the Supreme Lord extolled in the Vedas. You respond by saying its due to errant human behaviour, instead of quoting from the Vedas to prove otherwise. Hence, the lack of coherence is entirely with you.

 

Vedas proclaim Vishnu to be Supreme. Quoting Freud is not going to prove otherwise. How about some pramanas?

 

 

If you claim to follow vedas perfectly then do that perfectly. then you should be propounding Indra as the greatest god Every other are demigods.

 

Without a knowledge of philosophy, you childishly 'propound' too many things. Nonsensical views need to be corrected.

 

Let me explain. Vedas, for that matter, praise Agni, Vayu, Indra and Chandra. But in Kena Upanishad, it is clarified that Indra has ahamkara and that he is not all-powerful.

 

Mahanarayana Upanishad also claims that Indra, along with Adityas, Vasus, Maruts, etc. are born of Narayana.

 

See a contradiction? On one side, you have verses claiming Indra to be Supreme. On the other, you see some verses claiming Indra has faults. In yet another verse, birth of Indra is mentioned. How can a supreme god possess false ego, and have a birth?

 

So, what is the real explanation?

 

If you refer to Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, everything, Jivas, Prakrti and creation (includes Devas, as Vedas say devas are created by Narayana) is the body of Brahman.

 

When I call you 'Ravindran', I refer to two entities, ie, your body and soul. Hence, when Indra is hailed as supreme, two things are implied here: that Indra's soul is the body of Brahman. Hence, Brahman, the indweller of Indra, is being hailed as Supreme. Hence, Indra, who has faults and has been created, ie, had a normal birth, has an indweller who is Brahman.This resolves apparent contradictions.

 

In Brahma Vidyas (upasanas) such as Pratardana vidya and Madhu vidya, it is clearly stated that a mumukshu should meditate upon the Supreme Self having Indra and other deities as His body.

 

That Narayana is the antaryamin of everything is explained in many places in the Upanishads.

 

yachcha ki.nchit.h jagat.h sarvaM dR^ishyate shrUyate.api vaa |

a.ntarbahishcha tatsarvaM vyaapya naaraayaNaH sthitaH ||

 

 

Shall we have a desent discussion on Veda? A true true Vedic discussion. I am ready for that stuff. No freud, no Akbar nothing else othewrthan the Veda. Are you ready? Only Veda .No purana and all that stuff.

 

Ravindran

 

Since you have been quoting nonsense from indology, claiming that Indra is the highest Brahman, I doubt if you are mentally capable of a true true vedic discussion. However, proceed if you must.

[Ashok009]

SO U DEAR DARK WARRIOR (WHAT A SCREEN NAME, ACTUALLY BEFITTING OF YOUR THOUGHTS - DARK AND WARRIOR LIKE ) ARE CAPABLE OF DISCUSSING VEDAS.....WELL LET ME SEE...SOMEONE LIKE YOU IS PROCLAIMING TO KNOW IT ALL.....HMMM...THAT MY FRIEND IS A STRETCH BY ANY IMAGINATION.......SO U KNOW ALL THE ALPHABETS, U KNOW HOW TO MAKE SENTENCES, U KNOW HOW TO READ AND WRITE, SO U HAVE EXPERIENCED AND UNDERSOOD SPRITUALITY.........BOOO HOOOO......I THINK YOU ARE GREATER THAN GOD HIMSELF...EVEN HE WOULD NOT ARUGUE THE WAY U DO......FIRST FIND OUT WHO WROTE THE VEDAS

WHY THEY WERE WRITTEN...

ONCE U HAVE THE ANSWER (AND PLEASE ONLY AUTHENTIC AND VERIFIABLE ANSWERS ONLY) THEN COME AND TALK HERE .... DONT SAY VEDA SAID THIS OR THIS SAID THAT....PROOF PLS....THE WAY U ASK FOR PROOF...U BE READY TO PROVE NOW......

[Dark Warrior]

 

......I THINK YOU ARE GREATER THAN GOD HIMSELF

 

 

Well, technically, Vishishtadvaitins call themselves Seshas (servants) of the Lord. Its the Advaitins who insist on absolute identity upon transcending the vyavaharika, but even they do not insist they are greater than God.

 

So, I guess, being 'greater than god' must be either a new philosophy, or must not be a Vedantic premise. Oh well...

[Ashok009]

IS THAT ALL U UNDERSTOOD......THAT WAS MORE OF A PUN...IF U CAN UNDERSATND A PUN IS .......NO ONE IS GREATER THAN GOD.....WHAT IS WITH U AND QUOTING ALL THESE TEXST...WE KNOW AND RESPECT THAT U KNOW IT ALL ......U HAVE READ ALL....U HAVE LEARNT THEM BY HEART....AND U CAN ARGUE TILL THE LAST DAY OF YOUR LIFE.....BUT PLEASE AGAIN...ONLY VALID QUOTES....AND THAT TOO THE ONES THAT CAN BE PROVED WITH ORIGIN AND AUTHENTICATION SHOULD BE PRESENTED.....NO PROOF ....NO DISCUSSION....

[Amlesh]

Dear Ashok, can you limit Him by telling Him that Dear God you cannot have a Form.

 

He will reply, what's impossible for me.

 

I say say, He is Formless as well as He does have a Form. In his Form he is more complex and more beautiful.

 

I am the Basis of Brahman [says Krishna in BG]

[Dark Warrior]

 

IS THAT ALL U UNDERSTOOD......THAT WAS MORE OF A PUN...IF U CAN UNDERSATND A PUN IS

 

 

Have you understood what sarcasm is?

 

 

 

[Ashok009]

YES, U ARE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT...TO WORSHIP GOD IN A FORMLESS WAY IS VERY DIFFCULT FOR A HUMAN MIND....ALSO THERE IS NOTHING BEYOND gOD....HE CAN TAKE ANY FORM HE WANTS TOO.....A GOD IN THE FORM THAT WE HUMANS CAN UNDERSTAND IS IN HIS FULLEST GLORY......IT IS LIKE OUR SPRITUAL SOUL IS NOTHING BUT EMPTINESS....THE VACCUM OF NOTHINGNESS......

[Ashok009]

So U Still Cannot Prove Anything My Friend....bacause U Do Not Have Any Valid, Verifiable Proof....the Way U Wnat It.....scriptures Are Ways And Means They Are Not An End In Themselves.....they Are Merely Reference Guides......someones Own Experiences...or A Collection Of Experiences.....when U Have Had Your Own Experiences Then Come And Talk.......the Condition Is That They Have To Be Your Own ...something That U Have Felt, Seen Or Heard...trust Me When U Have Experienced That U Will Not Even Waste Your Time Reading This And That And Arguing All Over The Place Who Is Superior Or Who Is Supreme...

[Dark Warrior]

Yeah, I guess I need to retreat to the forest, grow a beard and 'experience' Jesus and Shiva merging into my side to be as enlightened as you appear to be.

 

Thanks for the tip.

[ranjeetmore]

this is ridiculous...ashok,if u say that the vedas are 'someone's thots',then i cant hold sensical discusion with u.The vedas are uncreated and extol Sri Krsna alone...if u have views otherwise...plz go to one of the 4 authentic sampradayas.They eat smartas,shaivites,shaktas and mayavadis for breakfast...

Vedas wer not WRITTEN BY AN AUTHOR.they wer scripted by vyasadeva...thats hw only vedas are of divine origin.

Kripaluji maharaj says,''there is only 1 thing given in the vedas,

And that is glorification of Shyamasundara.If some1 tells u diffrent'' he clearly declares,''bring him to me.(use mere paas leke aao.)''

[Amlesh]

 

So U Still Cannot Prove Anything My Friend....bacause U Do Not Have Any Valid, Verifiable Proof....the Way U Wnat It.....scriptures Are Ways And Means They Are Not An End In Themselves.....they Are Merely Reference Guides......someones Own Experiences...or A Collection Of Experiences.....when U Have Had Your Own Experiences Then Come And Talk.......the Condition Is That They Have To Be Your Own ...something That U Have Felt, Seen Or Heard...trust Me When U Have Experienced That U Will Not Even Waste Your Time Reading This And That And Arguing All Over The Place Who Is Superior Or Who Is Supreme...

 

The only one who can argue against a Vaishnava is a Vaishnava.

That too its for sport, cause both of them knows the Ultimate Conclusion

Only Diamond can Polish another Diamond.

 

Can I ask you for something??? Have you ever seen a philosophy that makes a person totally binded to God and also work for all creatures regardless of his garment.

 

Only Vaishnavism does that. Come to the point Dude, I'll not ask you for any proof but show me who apart from a Hari Bhakta had strive to help all people.

[Dark Warrior]

 

The only one who can argue against a Vaishnava is a Vaishnava.

 

I have to say, this thread gets better and better. This comment is priceless.

 

How about a meeting of the 'minds'? Two big brains, Ashok009 and Amlesh arguing would be appropriate, as they are both equally equipped for it.

 

 

They eat smartas,shaivites,shaktas and mayavadis for breakfast...

 

Dude, we are vegetarians/vegans, not cannibals.

[Ashok009]

GOING TO THE FOREST WILL NOT HELP AS THE TREES THERE WILL DRY UP LISTENING TO YOUR IGNORANT LOGIC, THE BEARD WONT GROWN AS IT WILL BE SCARED OF BEING FORCED TO LISTEN TO YOUR BANTER, SO JESUS AND SHIVA WIL NOT COME ANYWAY......EVEN IF THEY COULD COME ....... JESUS WOULD NOT COME AS HE IS STILL TRYING TO SETTLE THE DISPUTE BETWEEN CHRISTIANS ...AND SO FAR AS SHIVA IS CONCERENED HE IS ALSO BUSY TRYING TO SETTLE THE FUED BETWEEN HIM AND NARAYAN AND ALL OTHER GODS....ACTUALLY THEY ARE STILL FIGTING TO SEE WHO IS POWERFUL....AND SO FAR AS YOUR GETTING ELIGHTENED BY GOD ENTERING FROM YOUR SIDES ....WELL I GUESS HE WILL HAVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW HE ENTERS U ...CAUSE U MY FRIEND ARE CLOSED.

 

STIIL NO PROOF .......

[ranjeetmore]

how do v knw vedas r divine ?

The vedas themselves declare.

Why shud v acept it ? Becoz acepting such knwledge frm a authoritative source is cald shabda pramana.Shabda pramana is the highest method to gain knwledge.If u wish to find out through experiments who ur father is...ur free to do so.But it wud save you 1 billion years,if u simply asked your mother.Your mum,an authority,wil tel u that this persn is ur father.You acept her words.Shabda pramana.

Similarly,the veda is the mother and Bhagwan is the father of all living entities...YOU HAVE TO ACEPT THE VEDAS.otherwise,no real discussion based on divinity can be held.

[ranjeetmore]

darkwarrior...i wud appreciate if u climbed down frm the plane where ur sampradaya rules over all that be...plz learn to tolerate atleast felow Pro-vaishnavas.It wud be a great favour.

[ranjeetmore]

which sampradaya do u folow,darkwarior ?

[Ashok009]

HA HA HA....SO U R ALIGINING HERE ......U GUYS ARE WORSE THAN THE INDIAN POLITICS.......PLS PLS SUPPORT ME..HA HA HA

[Ravindran Kesavan]

Dear Dark warrior.

 

I am not goimg to react to your provocations of calling me childish, having nonsical views and rest of the name calling. Not that I dont have my valied diffence to counter them but I simply think that is true inappropriteness in a rational discussion and least spiritual. I rather respond to you purely at the rational debate with Stita prajna. I would not even have mentioned these things normally at the first place. But With you I am doing this because you should not assume that my civilised behaviour to be my weekness and acceptence of your accusations.

 

I will drop this at that and to rational spiritual discussion.

 

While you quoted many evidences for supporting your your thesis that Narayana is a suprime god - which I have no problem to accept at the first place,( only I have problem with the positions other gods inferior, I will come to the reason soon) - you have conspicuoukly silent about the very important vadic concept of Bhraman. What is your posion on it? I am asking this because, If we settle that issue first many unnessery debate which goes on this forum will disappear. Let me explain. Bhramin is the unifying concept. Braman is the source of everything . Braman is everything. All dualism and plurality is an illusion created by our lack of spiritual intution of bhraman. This applies to the myrrads of objects in the the physical world as well, as the thousands of gods that mankind ever worshiped and going to worship. In otherwords, God is one and that one theistic entity, one god, is called Bhraman. Different people of different languages of different geographical reagions of different cultures of different time period called the same thing with different names and conceived of different forms.

 

Sarvam Kalvidam Bhraman is the upanisadic truth. (I am including Upanisad as part of Vedas). Does veda contradict this vision anywhere?

 

Even Bhavad geeta declares the one who sees a dog and a priest (bramana) as equal, (as bhramin - or narayana, if you like - reaides in them , or manifestations of Bhraman) is a true jnani.

If that is the case where is the question of different gods being inferior or superior?

Sarva dharma Sama bhava is truely spiritual and a natural application of the one bhraman concept. Does veda reject this idea?

 

What is your position on this oneness concept?

 

I have heard some Vishnavite scholars arguing for the case that Advida - the oneness concept- is Sankara's, misinterpretation of Veda. I dont know whether you hold that position. But in case you hold that, I dont see any misinterpretation as Upnisads are quite explicit on it.

 

I like your hemaneutics of interpreting veda with out contradiction. You pointedd out the contradiction in asuming Indra as suprime and hence one must reject it. I expect the same rigour in your further analysis too. You need to interpret veda with out contradicting with the central notion of Bhraman. If any thing contradicts this central idea then that which contradicyts should be rejected - Unless of course you decide to reject the concept of Bhramin itself.

 

Regards,

K.Ravindran

[ranjeetmore]

yuck,that sounded so cheap frm ur mouth.....

Its basic vaishnava(nephyte or advanced) etiquette to respect another 1,irespective of his lineage...thats what i expect frm a felow suporter of Vishnu tattva as supreme,when i cme to post here.Got it ? Ur losing it,asok.