Guest guest Posted August 8, 2006 Report Share Posted August 8, 2006 Ohm Namo Bhagavathe Vasudevaya; Ohm Namo Narrayanaya Dear All, Goplalakrishnagi's views are correct. A Devotee never thinks about any other things other than Bhagavan. He has no problem weather it is Advaitha or Dwaitha. He never Confuses in any arguments. I replied only because the words used by krishnadaya was not sound good. It was just like insulting. I believe Krishnadaya dont know the rituals of Guruvayoor temple too. Its believed that we also have to worship Mamiyoor Siva to get the complete effect of Guruvayoor Darshan. Our yogi's were worshiping on the real energy source as easwer. There worshiped shape less god. If we also reached up to that limit we can also worship the god in form of energy. Regards Keerthi Kumar Ohm Namo Bhagavathe Vasudevaya; Ohm Namo Narrayanaya --- " K.V Gopalakrishna " <gopalakrishna.kv wrote: Dear Sunil and others, Radhe Krishna! A real Bhakta need not worry about Advaita, Dwaita, visishta-advaita,Jainism, Buddhism, etc. All these divisions do not help in any wayexcept dividing us. As we all know, Brahman, God without form,otherwise known as the " Whole Indivisible " is unique and without asecond. Then why break our head with all these pettysub-divisions? Show real Bhakti to God, whoever is your favouriteGod, Your Ishta-deivatam. Dont worry about your Gotram etc. We areall human beings. If some temple priest asks your Gotram and if youdont know your Gotram, tell the name of your Ishta-devatam. Gotram isreally the name of the ancient Rishi from whom one has had hisorigin. It is not necessary that one should remember that name allthe time. That is why I said, tell the name of your Ishta-deivatam. All these so-called divisions in faith stated above, are only in thelevel of the different mutts and the mata-adhipathis who head themutts. Let us leave it to the mata-adhipathis to sort it out. Mata-adhipathis should work together to unify our religion. I am sorryto say that by following these different faiths, we only divideourselves. So let us not be carried away by any of these. We hindusworship all Gods. When we worship Vishnu, we are Vaishnavites,devotees of Vishnu, and when we worship Siva, we are Saivites, devoteesof Siva. When we worship Muruga, let us call ourselves Muruga-bhaktas. In fact, all these Gods are but manifestations of the Supreme one. As the Supreme One has no form and one cannot focus his mind on aformless God, we have selected as Ishta-devatams, the form of themanifestation whom we like most, and worship him. .. I feel I am quite clear in my thinking, and this is the philosophy Ilike to adhere to. Regards, Yours, in humble submission, K.V. Gopalakrishna.. Sunil Menon wrote: Dear all, This is an interesting but confusing topic for many of us. Two years ago I was confused with the topic and I was compelled todo some research and talk with many Hindu scholars and teachersincluding a few Swamiji's from Kerala regarding the subject. It is notreally a confusing subject after I learnt the facts. First of all, everyone is right!Yes, from your own view points - because there is no common view point.However, if I can speak of majority of Hindu's in Kerala, I agree withKeerthi Kumar. Here is my research that gives you a widerview to decide for yourself- I never celebrated Deepavali or Holi inKerala, it was Onam, Vishu and Thiruvathira for me. I was never beenasked if I were a Vaishnavite or Saivaite, before I left Kerala. I wasalso never been asked for my GOTHRA before I left Kerala. However, once I stepped outside Kerala, things were different. Newworld, new questions and a slightly different Hinduism than I knew it.With new festivals and new questions came new confusions! I learnt about sparring factions of Hindu sects, heard ofdifferent versions and stories about the same festival, and startedwondering what is this 'Gothra' thing that they ask in temples when youneed to do a pooja (it was name and nakshatra in Kerala)! I even realized that there are small pockets of such divisionexists right inside in Kerala, like the Gowda Sarawat Brahmins who areVaishnavites! But while growing up in Kerala, I was busy cracking math,science and history and did not have much time for religious research.And I was oblivious to such deep divisions of Hinduism. Most of the answers came with some learning; Hinduism consists of several schools ofthought and Vaishnavism is ONE OF THE principal divisions. Saivism and Shaktism are others. But it does notstop there , majority of us are influenced by Advaita philosophy, prayto an array of deities, considering all of them as manifestations ofthe supreme, Brahman. Hence, majority of us do not belong to any of theabove divisions. Vaishnavism Vaishnavism adherents worship Vishnu or one of his avatars as thesupreme God and are principally monotheistic in nature. The HareKrishna movement or ISKCON is a modern example of a Vaishnaviteorganisation. Divisions of Vaishnava tradition Some of you will be surprised to know that there are sub-divisionsin Vaishnava tradition itself. Major sub-divisions are, Vishishtaadvaita ( " qualified nondualism " ), espoused byRamanuja; i.e., Srivaishnavism. Dvaita ( " dualism " ), espoused by Madhvacharya Achintya Bheda-Abheda, espoused by Sri Chaitanya adhered byGaudiya Vaishnavism. ISKCON ( " Hare Krishnas " ) is the most well knownbranch of this school. Shuddhaadvaita, espoused by Vallabhacharya Dvaitaadvaita, espoused by Nimbarka Vaishnava Belief Vaishnavas believe that Vishnu-Narayana is the one supreme God(Parabrahman) and all other living entities (including devas such asShiva and Durga) are subservient to Him. While other schools like Advaitism encourage people to interpretthe Vedas philosophically and metaphorically but not too literally,Vaishnavism stresses the literal meaning as primary and indirectmeaning as secondary. For example, according to Vaishnava theology,atman is not Brahman and Moksha doesn't mean " union with God " but " eternal life in heaven " . Good thing is that, with the entry of other religions into theIndian subcontinent, we became more united and the discriminations ofVaishnavism and Saivism turned more into intellectual arguments ratherthan mutually exclusive philosophies fighting each other. CONCLUSION So, in short, unless you belong to a smallpercentage distinct Vaishnava followers in Kerala like Gowda SaraswatBrahmins or you are initiated by a Guru to Vaishnavism, you do not haveto think much about this confusing topic. Also if Krishnadaya or anyoneelse follow Vaishnavism, they are absolutely right to do so and tellyou that they see Krishna as the only Supreme god head. Guruvayoor Temple As far I know Guruvayoor temple is not distinctly defined as aVaishnava tradition temple anywhere. Guruvayoor was the temple of Samoothiris,and there is no such mention as Samoothiri's were being Vaishnavites orShaivites. Also, Guruvayoor pooja routines were laid down by AdiSankaracharya and he is considered as a re-incarnation of Siva. It isimportant to note that Sankaracharya was not a Saivite or Vaishnavite,but written bhajans like Bhaja Govindam and Shivnandalahari. Reasons for our uniqueness Geographically, Kerala is isolated from the rest of India andbecause of this fact, our culture is quite unique, and so is ourHinduism. Hence, I also do not agree when someone from outside Keralatells me that we are not real Hindu's as we don't celebrate Deepavalior Holi! Regarding Gothra, well.. thats for another day! Please correct me of any errors, dearknowledgeable elders. Om Namo Narayanya: Sunil. guruvayur , KEERTHI KUMAR V MENON<keerthibai wrote: > > > Ohm Namo Bhagavathe Vasudevaya; Ohm Namo Narrayanaya > > Dear Krishnadaya and others, > > In kerala there is no difference between Vishnavates > or Saivates. Here all peoples worships in Siva and > vaishnava temples. Nobody is saying is saying we > worship only in vaishnava temple or in siva temple. > > Read Ramayana, you can see Rama worships siva in so > many places. I believe you must know about Ramaswaram > temple. > > The split between devotes of siva and vishnau is > created by ISKON now. The ISKON activates separates > devotees as Siva and Vaishnava. > > Why we have to argue ? We can call Gurauvayoorappan > > Ohm Namo Narrayanaya; Ohm Namo Bhagavathe vasudevaya > > Keerthi Kumar > > --- " K.V Gopalakrishna " gopalakrishna.kv > wrote: > > > > > Dear Sri. Ganapathy Raman, Krishnadaya and others. > > Radhe Krishna. > > There seems to be a small wrong understanding about > the term " Vaishnava. " . The term " Vaishnava " is > referred to also in many placesin Bhagavatam. It > means " the one who worships Vishnu " . It is wrongto > assume that a socalled " Vaishnava " can only worship > Vishnu. VishnuHimself is said to be worshipping Lord > Siva in many places. So it isthe understanding of the > term " Vaishnava " makes all the difference. > > Kindly pardon me for the interference. > In humble devotion, > KVG. > > > > GANAPATHY RAMAN wrote: So according to Krishnadaya > only people who are Vaishnavites areexpected to visit > and worship Sri Guruvayurappan and when the mainDeity > plays prominent role sub deities don't hv much > importance.Thisseems to be a strange theory that only > Vaishnavites shuld visit Krishnatemples and Saivites > visit Siva temples and thereby distinquishing eventhe > very nature of God and splitting Him into two parts as > VaishnavaGod and Saiva God.Quite strange.There is no > necesiity for any argumentas this requires only > commonsense that all people who visit Krishnatemple at > Guruvayur are not Vaishnavites as Krishnadaya > mayimagine.They also worshiip Siva ,Sastha and other > deities ofSaivites.Why shuld God be baulkanised as > Vaishnava God and Saiva God?InSiva temples too we hv > vaishnava deities and all worship that and nodisputes. > > Krishnadaya must also understand that Narayaneeyam > might hv beenmade by Melpathur but the glory of the > same was spread allover Indiaand abroad by the late > Anantharama Deekshidar who was a doyen ofdiscourses > and when he was afflicted by illness he went to GVR > andworshipped Sri Krishna thru Narayaneeyam and in > course got his diseasecured and from then onwards > wherever he went for doing discourses hemade it a > point to discourse Narayaneeyam and by that only many > peoplecame to know even the existence of such a > hymn.Perhaps you may not beaware this fact.That is why > even his photo is adorned along withbhatthathiri in > GVR temple.He was not a vaishnava but an > ardentSaiva.So don't try to make your conclusion that > Sri > Guruvayurappan belongs to only people who are > Vaishanavites andall who visit the temple are > vaishnavas.That has stemmed from yourimagination.I am > not arguing with you as it is a waste I know asyou hv > a definite mind set up which can't accept other > things.This Imentioned even in my reply earlier. > > Just by writing a comment an ardent devotee of > Krishna won'tchange or get confused as you imagine and > if the devotee does the samethen he or she is not a > devotee of Sri Krishna.Arguments wll always bethere > and not necessarily be taken as a matter of conversion > from onesect to another sect.Just becoz the vaishnava > acharyas reject advaitafollowers of Sankara and others > can that argument be accepted and doyou think it has > any sanctity?This seems to be some conversion > theorynever believe advaita and only what vaishnava > acharyas said believethose things.Such things shuld > not hv been written as the same willonly confuse the > real bhakthas of Sri Krishna.who will get > theimpression of worshipping saivite Gods like Siva > and others are againstreligious spirit.You believe in > whatever things as I hv already said inmy earlier > reply that all depends on individuals perceptions > andconvictions.But ridiculing Sankara undoubtedly the > Greatest of alland praising only the vaishnava > acharyas is not the proper way ofpresenting the matter > and shows your immaturity only.You must hv the > broad vision to accept all things enunciated by all > the acharyasand not confining yourself in some shelf. > > Anyways there is no meaning to say to you who can't > hv the mindto accept the views of others also and > clinging to one particularthing and rejecting all the > other Great people who brought glory toIndia, is > simply futile.I hv never criticised Gita,Bhagavatham > and youimagine something as if I am trying to wean > away the devotees ofKrishna to some other sect.I am > not for any such move but definitelyyour writings show > you are on that path which is simply ridiculous > andpitiable.For your info I am not for Vaishnava sect > or Saiva sect as Ilove both sects > and worship the Gods of both sects and also a good > follower ofSri Guruvayurappan and I may hv my own > Ishta Devata and that ispersonal. > > Again I say I wrote the reply not to offend you > neither this oneor the previous one but only to make > you understand that you shuld hvmore broad views on > spiritual matters and not live like a frog in a > well.God Blessdear friend Krishnadaya. and don't get > agitated by this reply as I hvtold only the truth and > as an answer to your reply.Let us stop withthis as you > hv certain mind set which does not allow to make > yourthinking broader and you must accept the fact that > God is One whetherVaishnava God or Saiva God. > krishnadayawrote > > Krishna, Guruvayoorappa, > > It is not advisable to argue when someone questions > the > fundamental supreme authority of Sri Krishna as well > as His literary > incarnations and restricts the scope of discussion to > non-vaishnava > saints . As such, this write up is just to remove the > confusion in > the minds of Krishna-bhaktas who were disturbed by the > mentioned > distortion . > > When a Vaishnava goes to Guruvayoor temple , he/she > worships the > presiding Deity Guruvayoorappan as well as the > sub-deities therein > namely Siva, Ganesha , Bhagavathy and Ayyappan . As > such the > question of spiritual intolerance doesn't arise . > > Ishta-devatha is a term meaning " the God one prays > most. " Sri > Krishna is the `Ishta-devatha of Vaishnavas for whom > focused Bhakti- > Yoga to Him is like life-air . > > Vaishnava authorites like Ramanuja , Madhava , > Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, > Melpathur Naryana Bhattathiri ,and Prabhupada have > asked their > followers to remain steadfast in their Bhakri-yoga by > fully complying > with Bhagavan's instructions . In fact , these > Acharyas strongly > rejected the Maya-vadi philosophy of the Advaitists .. > Accordingly, > the Vaishnavas are relying on specific scriptures like > Bhagavatham , > Gita and Narayaneeyam which have the stamp of approval > by Bhagavan > Krishna Himself . And Bhagavan provides His Devotees > with > opportunities and wisdom to understand the concepts of > the mentioned > scriptures . A designer has to comply with the > specified codes and > standards in order to produce an acceptable product .. > Same way , a > Vaishnava complies with the eternal instructions of > Sri Krishna > without fail . There is no difference between Sri > Krishna , His His > attributes and His instructions . > > Bhagavad Gita is relevant for all ages . Even in this > Kali-yuga , > Gita guides it's followers in the right path. > > A humble servant of Guruvayoorappan . > > ------------------------- > guruvayur ,GANAPATHY RAMAN > agraman62@ > wrote: > > > > This is only my thoughts and in no way be treated as > a rebuttal of > Krishnadayas postings as I hv already made known > Krishnadaya is a > devotee of Krishna and could not tolerate anything is > said other than > Krishna.But the fact is that Krishna is only one of > the eversomany > Gods in our Hindu mythology.Though His avatar was > different from > others and He preached Gita it becomes easier to quote > from what He > said.My point is then what abt other Gods and their > followers who > also get the same benefits which Krishna > promised.Krishna told only > arjuna in a battlefield His teachings.Following the > same in all > circumstances won't lead us > > in the present age as many of them are not > practicable.Hetaught > arjuna only to surrender to Him and fight the war > instead of running > out of the battle field and do the duty of a > Kshatriya.So just > banking only on Gita alone for all the ills of the > society won't help > much,I think.The teachings happened abt 4 or 5000 > years ago in a > different yuga and applying all the tenets in the > present age will > lead only to confusion.This does not mean I challenge > Krsihnadaya but > her wordings used seem to be not correct,I feel. > > > > Krishnadaya uses that jnanis is also devotees and > there arise > duality and such things.She harps on devotion and > diluting the same > amounts to absurdity.May be she is correct.But how > devotion comes?Is > it by seeing a Deity or by reading some texts or Gita? > She > elaborately quoted from Bhagavatam.Just becoz this > Group is dedicated > Sri Guruvayoorappan is it a must that one shuld quote > only > > from Gita,Bhagavatam and Narayaneeyam.Is there > anycompulsion.Or > the scriptures mean only these three.Then what abt > Nayanmars who are > 64 in number who worshipped Siva and made lot of hymns > in praise of > Him.Are they not followers or devotees?Sankara ,an > acknowledged > advaitin wrote Saundarya > > Lahiri,a beautiful celestial song on Devi shuld be > ignored?He was > no doubt a > > Realised soul and he never wrote that hymn for > himself as there > was no necessity for him as when one merged in the God > there is no > dualism but all can't become like him and hence he > coined so many > hymns on Devi ,Ananda Lahiri on Siva,Bhaja Govindam on > > Krishna,Subrahmanya bhujangam on Subrahmanya and there > was no > necesiity for him to do all those things when he knew > he was only > writing the same on himself being one with God but for > the > > other mortals like Krishnadaya and me to develop the > bhakthy > marga so that people like us can recite the same and > try to evolve > ourselves in the ladder of bhakthy. > > So too Ramakrishna Paramahansa worshipped Kali and > got her vision > and thru Her Grace got all the knowledge though he did > not study much > abt the scriptures and other things but becoz of the > Grace he could > quote so many teachings.The same thing is with sage > Ramana who took a > different path by > > having his own theory to find out whatwas he and > thru 'atma > vichara' he dived within himself and found that he was > also a speck > of the Creator.All Realised souls or jnanis though > initially they hv > to be bhakthas of some deitiy and thru severe > austerities and > spiritual discipline were able to merge in the Cosmic > Power and there > was no necessity for them to become a devotee again as > they hv > crossed that stage and when they had realised that all > are ONE then > who shuld be a devotee for whom?As we were having the > same problem > earlier I mentioned that the river is a river by name > only so long > the same reaches the ocean and when the same merges > with the ocean > then the identity of the river is lost and do you want > to say that > the ocean is a devotee of the river or vice versa when > the river has > already become one with the ocean? > > As I don't hv much knowledge abt sastras I can't > comment on > that.But how many sastras you know and do you know the > meaning of > what they import to the understanding of common people > like me.We > always hv readymade answer that such and such thing is > said in > sastras,Krishna has said such things in Gita, > > Bhagavatham says such and such things and so we > shuld follow.Then > are we not becoming something like a robot without > really > understanding and try to improve our own knowledge?For > anything and > everything we depend on some texts mean we just > surrender our God > given intelligence and wisdom to those quotes.Don' you > think so?Why > man is given intelligence and wisdom?To use it > > in a way that he or she shuld be able to study and > try to > understand both the aspects positive and negative and > the > applicability of the same in the times we live in and > not moving back > to several thousand years .We shuld try to study those > things and > also use our own versions and realise the reality > according to > change of times.What Gita says or Bhagavatham says > need not > necessarily be followed literally but one must use > one's senses and > try to intrepret > > according to needs.In the whole of the world how > many people are > real Krishna devotees?doyou think that you can make > the whole world > one of Krishna Conscious stage? I hv to ask you this > questions not > out of showing that I am greater than you in knowledge > or to show > some sort of ego complex which Idon't > > possess but your wordings are such which I can't > digest.Hence > this staright > > questions not to wound you but harping on one > subject only we > can't develop bhakthy but making ourselves adjusting > to the thoughts > of others only thru > > pursuasion one must try to make others realise the > facts that > contain in our > > statements.If you would hv covered all the aspects > of all deities > and all types of > > devotees of other deities then I would hv certainly > appreciated > you.But instead of that you chose the path of jnanis > and making that > others think devotion as absurdity are not in any way > ethical and it > shows some type of assertation that people who worship > other deities > and who got knowlede by worshipping their own deities > other than > Krishna are not devotees or bhakthas and attacking > jnanis are not the > proper way.Anyway you or I are not jnanis and then how > can we make > comment on them and no janni says thatyou hv to accept > his versions > only including Krishna who also distinguishes bhakthas > into four > categories. > > > > Your following of Krishna and your concern for Him > is laudable > but the way you hv presented is not palatable at least > to me.There > are so many saints who worship eversomany deities for > years and when > their karmic effects are over they > > get themselves merged in the Oneness and there is no > rebirth for > them and they need not come back again to hv more > experiences as even > Sri Krishna has said in Gita.Such souls are rarely > found and they > never exhibit themselves.So there is no more devotion > is required for > them as they hv become one with the Creator. > > Till we reach that time some following or devotion > of somebody is > a must and I used to say when one chooses one deity > one shuld cling > on to that.Then how bhakthy comes?Not from birth but > when the child > grows and the parents take the child to temples and > say good things > and the same shuld get imbibed in the mind of the > child and then it > will grow automatically over the years.Now a days how > many children > are taught bhakthy by their parents?Teaching Gita and > other things > can takeplace when the child grows up sufficiently > advanced and you > can't expect a child of even 10 to grasp what Krishna > said in > Gita.All those things > > can come only at a later part of time as Dr.Saroja > Ramanujam has > pointed in > > another mail.Till then the child will be more > interested in his > or her studies andto > > come out successfully in life and at that time if > you go on > teaching Gita and other things they will even lose > what little > interest they hv got.Even during Krishnas' time or > subsequent times > how many people knew Gita nobody knows.Actually I came > to get some > interest in Gita only after hearing a 'Gita Yagna' > which the late > Swami Chinmayanada used to conduct and I was attracted > by his > language,erudition,the wayhe used to pronounce the > subject in avery > lucid manner.So expecting too much and quoting Gita > and Bhagavatam > may be ok for a group but in real life I wonder how > far the same will > attract persons.Of course in all discourses people may > throng as > their is no dearth for people in thiscountry > > anywhere but afterwards what happen to them and > whether they > follow the teachings or just ignore and appreciate > only the > scholorlypresentation of the > > lecturer we don't know. > > Dear Krishna,if any of my sentences hv the effect of > wounding > your feelings kindly bear with me as it is not my > intention to offend > you in any manner.You wrote something and just I > countered that is > all.Since this will make other members also to take > part in a new > twist to the points I hv put some questions which > sometimes you may > find the same difficult to answer.So with all the > articles,as > putting questions is easy but to give a convincing > reply is difficult. > > Again I beg your excuses if you feel in anyway > offended by my > writings as I hv always treated you as my good > friend.Also I say I > am not against Bhagavatam, > > Gita and other scriptures but much dependence on the > sayings > won't help in the present day world as what Krishna > preached was > under different circumstances though they may be > applicable in some > cases and not in all respects. > > > > Hare Krishna, > > > > agraman. > > > > > > > > > > Here's a new way to find what you're looking for - > Answers > > > > Here's a new way to find what you're looking for - > Answers > > Tired of spam? Mail has the best spam protection around > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 9, 2006 Report Share Posted August 9, 2006 Krishna , Guruvayoorappa, I believe that `Vaishnava' is a person who worships Maha-Vishnu or one of His avataras as the `Ishta Devatha' ; and this doesn't mean any separate sect . And a Vaishnava endeavours to comply with the requirements mentioned in Gita, Bhagavatham and Narayaneeyam . Bhagavan Sri Krishna says in Gita , Chapter 11 : Sloka 7etam vibhutim yogam ca / mama yo vetti tattvatahso 'vikalpena yogena / yujyate natra samsayah(He who knows in truth My opulence and yogic power , has firm bhakti in Me. There is no doubt about this.)Sloka 8aham sarvasya prabhavo / mattah sarvam pravarttateiti matva bhajante mam / budha bhava-samanvitah(I am the source of both mundane and spiritual worlds. Everything emanates from Me. The wise who know this well, worship Me with great joy in their hearts.)Sloka 9mac-citta mad-gata-prana / bodhayantah parasparamkathayantas ca mam nityam / tusyanti ca ramanti ca(Those whose minds are fixed on Me and whose lives are surrendered to Me, derive great satisfaction from enlightening one another about my greatness and speaking about Me) . Sloka 10tesam satata-yuktanam / bhajatam priti-purvakamdadami buddhi-yogam tam / yena mam upayanti te(Those whose minds are devoted to Me worship Me with great joy. I Myself give to them the yoga of wisdom, by which they can come to Me) . Sri Krishnaya Namah!!Krishnadaya. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 9, 2006 Report Share Posted August 9, 2006 Dear Sri Keerthi Kumar and others, Radhe Krishna! My postings of some of my opinions on Bhakti -yoga and God-realisation etc, are among the little bit I learnt while going through many books like Bhagavatam, Narayaneeyam, Bhagavadgita, the Upanishads, Atma-bodha, Panchadasi, Vivekachoodamani, Upadesa-sahasri, Brahma-sutras, etc., out of sheer necessity first and interest picked up later. I am neither a scholar in Sanskrit which I had learnt only till graduation level as far back as 1950, nor am I a scholar of Vedanta philosophy. So the request I have to make is that these humble postings reflect only the little I have learnt during the creation of the English version of the Bhaktaranjini commentary of Narayaneeyam, a divine legacy in Malayalam, received from my revered father, and hence, should not be taken as authority. But I write only what I believe in. One's precept and practice should not be different from each other. In this forum of Guruvayoor and also Krishna Bhaktas, all our objectives are the same. We all have our own view about our beliefs and faiths. Among these, there is nothing right and nothing wrong. Our objective is common, to develop Bhakti to our Ishta-deivatam, and if it is already developed, to enhance it so that it can reach the zenith. In the process, we should try to develop mutual respect for each other's views, and seek guidance, in case other's views seem better than ours. Let us remember that in this deal, there is no victor and there is no vanquished. Ego should not find a place in any of our thoughts, words, write-ups and actions. Let us act as one unit, whether we call ourselves Vaishnavite, Saivites, Smarthas, etc., (but not atheists!) Warmest regards, Dasadidasa K.V. Gopalakrishna. KEERTHI KUMAR V MENON wrote: > Ohm Namo Bhagavathe Vasudevaya; Ohm Namo Narrayanaya > > Dear All, > > Goplalakrishnagi's views are correct. A Devotee never > thinks about any other things other than Bhagavan. He > has no problem weather it is Advaitha or Dwaitha. He > never Confuses in any arguments. I replied only > because the words used by krishnadaya was not sound > good. It was just like insulting. > > I believe Krishnadaya dont know the rituals of > Guruvayoor temple too. Its believed that we also have > to worship Mamiyoor Siva to get the complete effect of > Guruvayoor Darshan. > > Our yogi's were worshiping on the real energy source > as easwer. There worshiped shape less god. If we also > reached up to that limit we can also worship the god > in form of energy. > > Regards > > Keerthi Kumar > > Ohm Namo Bhagavathe Vasudevaya; Ohm Namo Narrayanaya > > --- " K.V Gopalakrishna " <gopalakrishna.kv > <gopalakrishna.kv%40gmail.com>> > wrote: > > > > Dear Sunil and others, > > Radhe Krishna! > > A real Bhakta need not worry about Advaita, Dwaita, > visishta-advaita,Jainism, Buddhism, etc. All these > divisions do not help in any wayexcept dividing us. > As we all know, Brahman, God without form,otherwise > known as the " Whole Indivisible " is unique and > without asecond. Then why break our head with all > these pettysub-divisions? Show real Bhakti to God, > whoever is your favouriteGod, Your Ishta-deivatam. > Dont worry about your Gotram etc. We areall human > beings. If some temple priest asks your Gotram and > if youdont know your Gotram, tell the name of your > Ishta-devatam. Gotram isreally the name of the > ancient Rishi from whom one has had hisorigin. It is > not necessary that one should remember that name > allthe time. That is why I said, tell the name of > your Ishta-deivatam. > > All these so-called divisions in faith stated above, > are only in thelevel of the different mutts and the > mata-adhipathis who head themutts. Let us leave it to > the mata-adhipathis to sort it out. Mata-adhipathis > should work together to unify our religion. I am > sorryto say that by following these different faiths, > we only divideourselves. So let us not be carried > away by any of these. We hindusworship all Gods. > When we worship Vishnu, we are Vaishnavites,devotees > of Vishnu, and when we worship Siva, we are Saivites, > devoteesof Siva. When we worship Muruga, let us call > ourselves Muruga-bhaktas. In fact, all these Gods are > but manifestations of the Supreme one. As the Supreme > One has no form and one cannot focus his mind on > aformless God, we have selected as Ishta-devatams, the > form of themanifestation whom we like most, and > worship him. .. > > I feel I am quite clear in my thinking, and this is > the philosophy Ilike to adhere to. > > Regards, > Yours, in humble submission, > K.V. Gopalakrishna.. > > Sunil Menon wrote: > Dear all, > > This is an interesting but confusing topic for many of > us. > > Two years ago I was confused with the topic and I was > compelled todo some research and talk with many Hindu > scholars and teachersincluding a few Swamiji's from > Kerala regarding the subject. It is notreally a > confusing subject after I learnt the facts. > > First of all, everyone is right!Yes, from your own > view points - because there is no common view > point.However, if I can speak of majority of Hindu's > in Kerala, I agree withKeerthi Kumar. > > Here is my research that gives you a widerview to > decide for yourself- > > > I never celebrated Deepavali or Holi inKerala, it was > Onam, Vishu and Thiruvathira for me. I was never > beenasked if I were a Vaishnavite or Saivaite, before > I left Kerala. I wasalso never been asked for my > GOTHRA before I left Kerala. > > However, once I stepped outside Kerala, things were > different. Newworld, new questions and a slightly > different Hinduism than I knew it.With new festivals > and new questions came new confusions! > > I learnt about sparring factions of Hindu sects, heard > ofdifferent versions and stories about the same > festival, and startedwondering what is this 'Gothra' > thing that they ask in temples when youneed to do a > pooja (it was name and nakshatra in Kerala)! > > I even realized that there are small pockets of such > divisionexists right inside in Kerala, like the Gowda > Sarawat Brahmins who areVaishnavites! But while > growing up in Kerala, I was busy cracking math,science > and history and did not have much time for religious > research.And I was oblivious to such deep divisions of > Hinduism. > > > Most of the answers came with some learning; > > Hinduism consists of several schools ofthought and > Vaishnavism is ONE OF THE principal divisions. Saivism > and Shaktism are others. But it does notstop there , > majority of us are influenced by Advaita philosophy, > prayto an array of deities, considering all of them as > manifestations ofthe supreme, Brahman. Hence, majority > of us do not belong to any of theabove divisions. > > > Vaishnavism > > Vaishnavism adherents worship Vishnu or one of his > avatars as thesupreme God and are principally > monotheistic in nature. The HareKrishna movement or > ISKCON is a modern example of a > Vaishnaviteorganisation. > > > Divisions of Vaishnava tradition > > Some of you will be surprised to know that there are > sub-divisionsin Vaishnava tradition itself. Major > sub-divisions are, > > Vishishtaadvaita ( " qualified nondualism " ), > espoused byRamanuja; i.e., Srivaishnavism. > > Dvaita ( " dualism " ), espoused by Madhvacharya > > Achintya Bheda-Abheda, espoused by Sri > Chaitanya adhered byGaudiya Vaishnavism. ISKCON ( " Hare > Krishnas " ) is the most well knownbranch of this > school. > > Shuddhaadvaita, espoused by Vallabhacharya > > Dvaitaadvaita, espoused by Nimbarka > > > Vaishnava Belief > > Vaishnavas believe that Vishnu-Narayana is the one > supreme God(Parabrahman) and all other living entities > (including devas such asShiva and Durga) are > subservient to Him. > > While other schools like Advaitism encourage people to > interpretthe Vedas philosophically and metaphorically > but not too literally,Vaishnavism stresses the literal > meaning as primary and indirectmeaning as secondary. > For example, according to Vaishnava theology,atman is > not Brahman and Moksha doesn't mean " union with God " > but " eternal life in heaven " . > > Good thing is that, with the entry of other religions > into theIndian subcontinent, we became more united and > the discriminations ofVaishnavism and Saivism turned > more into intellectual arguments ratherthan mutually > exclusive philosophies fighting each other. > > > CONCLUSION > > So, in short, unless you belong to a smallpercentage > distinct Vaishnava followers in Kerala like Gowda > SaraswatBrahmins or you are initiated by a Guru to > Vaishnavism, you do not haveto think much about this > confusing topic. Also if Krishnadaya or anyoneelse > follow Vaishnavism, they are absolutely right to do so > and tellyou that they see Krishna as the only Supreme > god head. > > > Guruvayoor Temple > > As far I know Guruvayoor temple is not distinctly > defined as aVaishnava tradition temple anywhere. > Guruvayoor was the temple of Samoothiris,and there is > no such mention as Samoothiri's were being > Vaishnavites orShaivites. > > > Also, Guruvayoor pooja routines were laid down by > AdiSankaracharya and he is considered as a > re-incarnation of Siva. It isimportant to note that > Sankaracharya was not a Saivite or Vaishnavite,but > written bhajans like Bhaja Govindam and > Shivnandalahari. > > > Reasons for our uniqueness > > Geographically, Kerala is isolated from the rest of > India andbecause of this fact, our culture is quite > unique, and so is ourHinduism. Hence, I also do not > agree when someone from outside Keralatells me that we > are not real Hindu's as we don't celebrate Deepavalior > Holi! > > > Regarding Gothra, well.. thats for another day! > > > Please correct me of any errors, dearknowledgeable > elders. > > > Om Namo Narayanya: > > > Sunil. > > guruvayur <guruvayur%40>, > KEERTHI KUMAR V > MENON<keerthibai wrote: > > > > > > Ohm Namo Bhagavathe Vasudevaya; Ohm Namo Narrayanaya > > > > Dear Krishnadaya and others, > > > > In kerala there is no difference between Vishnavates > > or Saivates. Here all peoples worships in Siva and > > vaishnava temples. Nobody is saying is saying we > > worship only in vaishnava temple or in siva temple. > > > > Read Ramayana, you can see Rama worships siva in so > > many places. I believe you must know about > Ramaswaram > > temple. > > > > The split between devotes of siva and vishnau is > > created by ISKON now. The ISKON activates separates > > devotees as Siva and Vaishnava. > > > > Why we have to argue ? We can call Gurauvayoorappan > > > > Ohm Namo Narrayanaya; Ohm Namo Bhagavathe vasudevaya > > > > Keerthi Kumar > > > > --- " K.V Gopalakrishna " gopalakrishna.kv > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Sri. Ganapathy Raman, Krishnadaya and others. > > > > Radhe Krishna. > > > > There seems to be a small wrong understanding about > > the term " Vaishnava. " . The term " Vaishnava " is > > referred to also in many placesin Bhagavatam. It > > means " the one who worships Vishnu " . It is wrongto > > assume that a socalled " Vaishnava " can only worship > > Vishnu. VishnuHimself is said to be worshipping Lord > > Siva in many places. So it isthe understanding of > the > > term " Vaishnava " makes all the difference. > > > > Kindly pardon me for the interference. > > In humble devotion, > > KVG. > > > > > > > > GANAPATHY RAMAN wrote: So according to Krishnadaya > > only people who are Vaishnavites areexpected to > visit > > and worship Sri Guruvayurappan and when the > mainDeity > > plays prominent role sub deities don't hv much > > importance.Thisseems to be a strange theory that > only > > Vaishnavites shuld visit Krishnatemples and Saivites > > visit Siva temples and thereby distinquishing > eventhe > > very nature of God and splitting Him into two parts > as > > VaishnavaGod and Saiva God.Quite strange.There is no > > necesiity for any argumentas this requires only > > commonsense that all people who visit Krishnatemple > at > > Guruvayur are not Vaishnavites as Krishnadaya > > mayimagine.They also worshiip Siva ,Sastha and other > > deities ofSaivites.Why shuld God be baulkanised as > > Vaishnava God and Saiva God?InSiva temples too we hv > > vaishnava deities and all worship that and > nodisputes. > > > > Krishnadaya must also understand that Narayaneeyam > > might hv beenmade by Melpathur but the glory of the > > same was spread allover Indiaand abroad by the late > > Anantharama Deekshidar who was a doyen ofdiscourses > > and when he was afflicted by illness he went to GVR > > andworshipped Sri Krishna thru Narayaneeyam and in > > course got his diseasecured and from then onwards > > wherever he went for doing discourses hemade it a > > point to discourse Narayaneeyam and by that only > many > > peoplecame to know even the existence of such a > > hymn.Perhaps you may not beaware this fact.That is > why > > even his photo is adorned along withbhatthathiri in > > GVR temple.He was not a vaishnava but an > > ardentSaiva.So don't try to make your conclusion > that > > Sri > > Guruvayurappan belongs to only people who are > > Vaishanavites andall who visit the temple are > > vaishnavas.That has stemmed from yourimagination.I > am > > not arguing with you as it is a waste I know asyou > hv > > a definite mind set up which can't accept other > > things.This Imentioned even in my reply earlier. > > > > Just by writing a comment an ardent devotee of > > Krishna won'tchange or get confused as you imagine > and > > if the devotee does the samethen he or she is not a > > devotee of Sri Krishna.Arguments wll always bethere > > and not necessarily be taken as a matter of > conversion > > from onesect to another sect.Just becoz the > vaishnava > > acharyas reject advaitafollowers of Sankara and > others > > can that argument be accepted and doyou think it has > > any sanctity?This seems to be some conversion > > theorynever believe advaita and only what vaishnava > > acharyas said believethose things.Such things shuld > > not hv been written as the same willonly confuse the > > real bhakthas of Sri Krishna.who will get > > theimpression of worshipping saivite Gods like Siva > > and others are againstreligious spirit.You believe > in > > whatever things as I hv already said inmy earlier > > reply that all depends on individuals perceptions > > andconvictions.But ridiculing Sankara undoubtedly > the > > Greatest of alland praising only the vaishnava > > acharyas is not the proper way ofpresenting the > matter > > and shows your immaturity only.You must hv the > > broad vision to accept all things enunciated by all > > the acharyasand not confining yourself in some > shelf. > > > > Anyways there is no meaning to say to you who can't > > hv the mindto accept the views of others also and > > clinging to one particularthing and rejecting all > the > > other Great people who brought glory toIndia, is > > simply futile.I hv never criticised Gita,Bhagavatham > > and youimagine something as if I am trying to wean > > away the devotees ofKrishna to some other sect.I am > > not for any such move but definitelyyour writings > show > > you are on that path which is simply ridiculous > > andpitiable.For your info I am not for Vaishnava > sect > > or Saiva sect as Ilove both sects > > and worship the Gods of both sects and also a good > > follower ofSri Guruvayurappan and I may hv my own > > Ishta Devata and that ispersonal. > > > > Again I say I wrote the reply not to offend you > > neither this oneor the previous one but only to make > > you understand that you shuld hvmore broad views on > > spiritual matters and not live like a frog in a > > well.God Blessdear friend Krishnadaya. and don't get > > agitated by this reply as I hvtold only the truth > and > > as an answer to your reply.Let us stop withthis as > you > > hv certain mind set which does not allow to make > > yourthinking broader and you must accept the fact > that > > God is One whetherVaishnava God or Saiva God. > > krishnadayawrote > > > > Krishna, Guruvayoorappa, > > > > It is not advisable to argue when someone questions > > the > > fundamental supreme authority of Sri Krishna as well > > as His literary > > incarnations and restricts the scope of discussion > to > > non-vaishnava > > saints . As such, this write up is just to remove > the > > confusion in > > the minds of Krishna-bhaktas who were disturbed by > the > > mentioned > > distortion . > > > > When a Vaishnava goes to Guruvayoor temple , he/she > > worships the > > presiding Deity Guruvayoorappan as well as the > > sub-deities therein > > namely Siva, Ganesha , Bhagavathy and Ayyappan . As > > such the > > question of spiritual intolerance doesn't arise . > > > > Ishta-devatha is a term meaning " the God one prays > > most. " Sri > > Krishna is the `Ishta-devatha of Vaishnavas for whom > > focused Bhakti- > > Yoga to Him is like life-air . > > > > Vaishnava authorites like Ramanuja , Madhava , > > Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, > > Melpathur Naryana Bhattathiri ,and Prabhupada have > > asked their > > followers to remain steadfast in their Bhakri-yoga > by > > fully complying > > with Bhagavan's instructions . In fact , these > > Acharyas strongly > > rejected the Maya-vadi philosophy of the Advaitists > . > > Accordingly, > > the Vaishnavas are relying on specific scriptures > like > > Bhagavatham , > > Gita and Narayaneeyam which have the stamp of > approval > > by Bhagavan > > Krishna Himself . And Bhagavan provides His Devotees > > with > > opportunities and wisdom to understand the concepts > of > > the mentioned > > scriptures . A designer has to comply with the > > specified codes and > > standards in order to produce an acceptable product > . > > Same way , a > > Vaishnava complies with the eternal instructions of > > Sri Krishna > > without fail . There is no difference between Sri > > Krishna , His His > > attributes and His instructions . > > > > Bhagavad Gita is relevant for all ages . Even in > this > > Kali-yuga , > > Gita guides it's followers in the right path. > > > > A humble servant of Guruvayoorappan . > > > > > ------------------------- > > guruvayur > <guruvayur%40>,GANAPATHY RAMAN > > agraman62@ > > wrote: > > > > > > This is only my thoughts and in no way be treated > as > > a rebuttal of > > Krishnadayas postings as I hv already made known > > Krishnadaya is a > > devotee of Krishna and could not tolerate anything > is > > said other than > > Krishna.But the fact is that Krishna is only one of > > the eversomany > > Gods in our Hindu mythology.Though His avatar was > > different from > > others and He preached Gita it becomes easier to > quote > > from what He > > said.My point is then what abt other Gods and their > > followers who > > also get the same benefits which Krishna > > promised.Krishna told only > > arjuna in a battlefield His teachings.Following the > > same in all > > circumstances won't lead us > > > in the present age as many of them are not > > practicable.Hetaught > > arjuna only to surrender to Him and fight the war > > instead of running > > out of the battle field and do the duty of a > > Kshatriya.So just > > banking only on Gita alone for all the ills of the > > society won't help > > much,I think.The teachings happened abt 4 or 5000 > > years ago in a > > different yuga and applying all the tenets in the > > present age will > > lead only to confusion.This does not mean I > challenge > > Krsihnadaya but > > her wordings used seem to be not correct,I feel. > > > > > > Krishnadaya uses that jnanis is also devotees and > > there arise > > duality and such things.She harps on devotion and > > diluting the same > > amounts to absurdity.May be she is correct.But how > > devotion comes?Is > > it by seeing a Deity or by reading some texts or > Gita? > > She > > elaborately quoted from Bhagavatam.Just becoz this > > Group is dedicated > > Sri Guruvayoorappan is it a must that one shuld > quote > > only > > > from Gita,Bhagavatam and Narayaneeyam.Is there > > anycompulsion.Or > > the scriptures mean only these three.Then what abt > > Nayanmars who are > > 64 in number who worshipped Siva and made lot of > hymns > > in praise of > > Him.Are they not followers or devotees?Sankara ,an > > acknowledged > > advaitin wrote Saundarya > > > Lahiri,a beautiful celestial song on Devi shuld be > > ignored?He was > > no doubt a > > > Realised soul and he never wrote that hymn for > > himself as there > > was no necessity for him as when one merged in the > God > > there is no > > dualism but all can't become like him and hence he > > coined so many > > hymns on Devi ,Ananda Lahiri on Siva,Bhaja Govindam > on > > > > Krishna,Subrahmanya bhujangam on Subrahmanya and > there > > was no > > necesiity for him to do all those things when he > knew > > he was only > > writing the same on himself being one with God but > for > > the > > > other mortals like Krishnadaya and me to develop > the > > bhakthy > > marga so that people like us can recite the same and > > try to evolve > > ourselves in the ladder of bhakthy. > > > So too Ramakrishna Paramahansa worshipped Kali and > > got her vision > > and thru Her Grace got all the knowledge though he > did > > not study much > > abt the scriptures and other things but becoz of the > > Grace he could > > quote so many teachings.The same thing is with sage > > Ramana who took a > > different path by > > > having his own theory to find out whatwas he and > > thru 'atma > > vichara' he dived within himself and found that he > was > > also a speck > > of the Creator.All Realised souls or jnanis though > > initially they hv > > to be bhakthas of some deitiy and thru severe > > austerities and > > spiritual discipline were able to merge in the > Cosmic > > Power and there > > was no necessity for them to become a devotee again > as > > they hv > > crossed that stage and when they had realised that > all > > are ONE then > > who shuld be a devotee for whom?As we were having > the > > same problem > > earlier I mentioned that the river is a river by > name > > only so long > > the same reaches the ocean and when the same merges > > with the ocean > > then the identity of the river is lost and do you > want > > to say that > > the ocean is a devotee of the river or vice versa > when > > the river has > > already become one with the ocean? > > > As I don't hv much knowledge abt sastras I can't > > comment on > > that.But how many sastras you know and do you know > the > > meaning of > > what they import to the understanding of common > people > > like me.We > > always hv readymade answer that such and such thing > is > > said in > > sastras,Krishna has said such things in Gita, > > > Bhagavatham says such and such things and so we > > shuld follow.Then > > are we not becoming something like a robot without > > really > > understanding and try to improve our own > knowledge?For > > anything and > > everything we depend on some texts mean we just > > surrender our God > > given intelligence and wisdom to those quotes.Don' > you > > think so?Why > > man is given intelligence and wisdom?To use it > > > in a way that he or she shuld be able to study and > > try to > > understand both the aspects positive and negative > and > > the > > applicability of the same in the times we live in > and > > not moving back > > to several thousand years .We shuld try to study > those > > things and > > also use our own versions and realise the reality > > according to > > change of times.What Gita says or Bhagavatham says > > need not > > necessarily be followed literally but one must use > > one's senses and > > try to intrepret > > > according to needs.In the whole of the world how > > many people are > > real Krishna devotees?doyou think that you can make > > the whole world > > one of Krishna Conscious stage? I hv to ask you this > > questions not > > out of showing that I am greater than you in > knowledge > > or to show > > some sort of ego complex which Idon't > > > possess but your wordings are such which I can't > > digest.Hence > > this staright > > > questions not to wound you but harping on one > > subject only we > > can't develop bhakthy but making ourselves adjusting > > to the thoughts > > of others only thru > > > pursuasion one must try to make others realise the > > facts that > > contain in our > > > statements.If you would hv covered all the aspects > > of all deities > > and all types of > > > devotees of other deities then I would hv > certainly > > appreciated > > you.But instead of that you chose the path of jnanis > > and making that > > others think devotion as absurdity are not in any > way > > ethical and it > > shows some type of assertation that people who > worship > > other deities > > and who got knowlede by worshipping their own > deities > > other than > > Krishna are not devotees or bhakthas and attacking > > jnanis are not the > > proper way.Anyway you or I are not jnanis and then > how > > can we make > > comment on them and no janni says thatyou hv to > accept > > his versions > > only including Krishna who also distinguishes > bhakthas > > into four > > categories. > > > > > > Your following of Krishna and your concern for Him > > is laudable > > but the way you hv presented is not palatable at > least > > to me.There > > are so many saints who worship eversomany deities > for > > years and when > > their karmic effects are over they > > > get themselves merged in the Oneness and there is > no > > rebirth for > > them and they need not come back again to hv more > > experiences as even > > Sri Krishna has said in Gita.Such souls are rarely > > found and they > > never exhibit themselves.So there is no more > devotion > > is required for > > them as they hv become one with the Creator. > > > Till we reach that time some following or devotion > > of somebody is > > a must and I used to say when one chooses one deity > > one shuld cling > > on to that.Then how bhakthy comes?Not from birth but > > when the child > > grows and the parents take the child to temples and > > say good things > > and the same shuld get imbibed in the mind of the > > child and then it > > will grow automatically over the years.Now a days > how > > many children > > are taught bhakthy by their parents?Teaching Gita > and > > other things > > can takeplace when the child grows up sufficiently > > advanced and you > > can't expect a child of even 10 to grasp what > Krishna > > said in > > Gita.All those things > > > can come only at a later part of time as Dr.Saroja > > Ramanujam has > > pointed in > > > another mail.Till then the child will be more > > interested in his > > or her studies andto > > > come out successfully in life and at that time if > > you go on > > teaching Gita and other things they will even lose > > what little > > interest they hv got.Even during Krishnas' time or > > subsequent times > > how many people knew Gita nobody knows.Actually I > came > > to get some > > interest in Gita only after hearing a 'Gita Yagna' > > which the late > > Swami Chinmayanada used to conduct and I was > attracted > > by his > > language,erudition,the wayhe used to pronounce the > > subject in avery > > lucid manner.So expecting too much and quoting Gita > > and Bhagavatam > > may be ok for a group but in real life I wonder how > > far the same will > > attract persons.Of course in all discourses people > may > > throng as > > their is no dearth for people in thiscountry > > > anywhere but afterwards what happen to them and > > whether they > > follow the teachings or just ignore and appreciate > > only the > > scholorlypresentation of the > > > lecturer we don't know. > > > Dear Krishna,if any of my sentences hv the effect > of > > wounding > > your feelings kindly bear with me as it is not my > > intention to offend > > you in any manner.You wrote something and just I > > countered that is > > all.Since this will make other members also to take > > part in a new > > twist to the points I hv put some questions which > > sometimes you may > > find the same difficult to answer.So with all the > > articles,as > > putting questions is easy but to give a convincing > > reply is difficult. > > > Again I beg your excuses if you feel in anyway > > offended by my > > writings as I hv always treated you as my good > > friend.Also I say I > > am not against Bhagavatam, > > > Gita and other scriptures but much dependence on > the > > sayings > > won't help in the present day world as what Krishna > > preached was > > under different circumstances though they may be > > applicable in some > > cases and not in all respects. > > > > > > Hare Krishna, > > > > > > agraman. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here's a new way to find what you're looking for - > > Answers > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here's a new way to find what you're looking for - > > Answers > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tired of spam? Mail has the best spam > protection around > > <> > > > > > > > > <> > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 9, 2006 Report Share Posted August 9, 2006 HARI AUM I think Shree Sunil has very beautifully and convincingly detailed the reasons for the dual and multiple ways of looking at these concepts: " " First of all, everyone is right!Yes, from your own view points - because there is no common view point " " Bhagavan himself has detailed the many facets of his 'supreme energy' in the Gita itself. A person will attain realisation when he crosses the 'duality' that is peceived due to the veiling of 'Maya'. i.e 'as Bhagavab says: 'chinnadwaidha'. The usual example quoted is the 'dream' that a person sees while sleeping. During that 'dream' state the person experiences the pleasure and pain in all its force, and on waking up from slumber realises that what he experienced was a 'dream'. The point is, to realise this, the person need to 'wake' up. Till then the whole thing can be understood only intellectually not in reality. So as Bhagavan said-continue doing whatever suits one, but please do check it up with the standard of 'dharma' . Once that is figured out have guts to stick with it. I suggest that the group can take a little more effort to understand Bhagavan and his teachings thru his 'Gita' which itself will clear most of these concepts to a great extent. Even then there could be deficiencies due to -as Shree Sunil said: " " Advaitism encourage people to interpret the Vedas philosophically and metaphorically but not too literally,Vaishnavism stresses the literal meaning as primary and indirectmeaning as secondary. For example, according to Vaishnava theology,atman is not Brahman and Moksha doesn't mean " union with God " but " eternal life in heaven " " . All in all these kind of discussions bringforth a lot of ideas to the open to the benefit of all. Only thing we need to be careful is not to make any personal allegations and remarks which will mar the peaceful co-existence. Bhagavan said: " anudwekakaram vakyam satyam priyam hitam cha yat swadhyabhyasanamchaiva vangmayam thava uchayathe " Regards Balagopal NARAYANA NARAYANA NARAYANA --- krishnadaya <krishnadaya wrote: > > Krishna , Guruvayoorappa, > > I believe that `Vaishnava' is a person who worships > Maha-Vishnu > or one of His avataras as the `Ishta Devatha' ; and > this > doesn't mean any separate sect . And a Vaishnava > endeavours to > comply with the requirements mentioned in Gita, > Bhagavatham and > Narayaneeyam . > > Bhagavan Sri Krishna says in Gita , Chapter 11 : > > Sloka 7 > > etam vibhutim yogam ca / mama yo vetti tattvatah > so 'vikalpena yogena / yujyate natra samsayah > > (He who knows in truth My opulence and yogic power > , has firm bhakti > in Me. There is no doubt about this.) > > Sloka 8 > > aham sarvasya prabhavo / mattah sarvam pravarttate > iti matva bhajante mam / budha bhava-samanvitah > > (I am the source of both mundane and spiritual > worlds. Everything > emanates from Me. The wise who know this well, > worship Me with great joy > in their hearts.) > > Sloka 9 > > mac-citta mad-gata-prana / bodhayantah parasparam > kathayantas ca mam nityam / tusyanti ca ramanti ca > > (Those whose minds are fixed on Me and whose lives > are surrendered to > Me, derive great satisfaction from enlightening one > another about my > greatness and speaking about Me) . > > Sloka 10 > > tesam satata-yuktanam / bhajatam priti-purvakam > dadami buddhi-yogam tam / yena mam upayanti te > > (Those whose minds are devoted to Me worship Me > with great joy. I > Myself give to them the yoga of wisdom, by which > they can come to Me) . > > > Sri Krishnaya Namah!! > Krishnadaya. > ________ India Answers: Share what you know. Learn something new http://in.answers./ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2006 Report Share Posted August 10, 2006 Dear Shri Gopalakrishnaji Thank you very much for giving your comments in a nutshell and very simple to understand. I also believe that when God created the universe he did not make any divisions like Vaishnavites, Saivites etc. It was all man made. Ofcourse I agree that there should be an Ishta Devatha for anyone and it can be Vishnu, Siva , Devi, Murugan, Ganapthi etc. I had heard that Shree Sankaracharya was a great devotee of Lord Siva, but he also worhsipped Devi and Vishnu. It seems he wrote a stotram called "Shree Lakshmi Narasimha Stotram" praising Lord Guruvayoorappan to get rid of the Samsara dukham. Also I read in some books that if we do not know the diety in a particular temple, we can always pray taking the name of our Ishta devata. As mentioned by you, "The Supreme One has no form and since we cannot focus our mind on a formless God, we select an Ishta Devata whose form and manifestation we like most and worship him. Irrespective of whom we worship , the result we will be getting will depend on how devoted and pure our mind is while doing the prayer If I am wrong in my interpretation, please correct me as I do not have much knowledge on this. Sincerely Syamala"K.V Gopalakrishna" <gopalakrishna.kv wrote: Dear Sunil and others,Radhe Krishna!A real Bhakta need not worry about Advaita, Dwaita, visishta-advaita, Jainism, Buddhism, etc. All these divisions do not help in any way except dividing us. As we all know, Brahman, God without form, otherwise known as the "Whole Indivisible " is unique and without a second. Then why break our head with all these petty sub-divisions? Show real Bhakti to God, whoever is your favourite God, Your Ishta-deivatam. Dont worry about your Gotram etc. We are all human beings. If some temple priest asks your Gotram and if you dont know your Gotram, tell the name of your Ishta-devatam. Gotram is really the name of the ancient Rishi from whom one has had his origin. It is not necessary that one should remember that name all the time. That is why I said, tell the name of your Ishta-deivatam.All these so-called divisions in faith stated above, are only in the level of the different mutts and the mata-adhipathis who head the mutts. Let us leave it to the mata-adhipathis to sort it out. Mata-adhipathis should work together to unify our religion. I am sorry to say that by following these different faiths, we only divide ourselves. So let us not be carried away by any of these. We hindus worship all Gods. When we worship Vishnu, we are Vaishnavites, devotees of Vishnu, and when we worship Siva, we are Saivites, devotees of Siva. When we worship Muruga, let us call ourselves Muruga-bhaktas. In fact, all these Gods are but manifestations of the Supreme one. As the Supreme One has no form and one cannot focus his mind on a formless God, we have selected as Ishta-devatams, the form of the manifestation whom we like most, and worship him. .. I feel I am quite clear in my thinking, and this is the philosophy I like to adhere to.Regards,Yours, in humble submission,K.V. Gopalakrishna..Sunil Menon wrote: Dear all, This is an interesting but confusing topic for many of us. Two years ago I was confused with the topic and I was compelled to do some research and talk with many Hindu scholars and teachers including a few Swamiji's from Kerala regarding the subject. It is not really a confusing subject after I learnt the facts. First of all, everyone is right! Yes, from your own view points - because there is no common view point. However, if I can speak of majority of Hindu's in Kerala, I agree with Keerthi Kumar. Here is my research that gives you a wider view to decide for yourself- I never celebrated Deepavali or Holi in Kerala, it was Onam, Vishu and Thiruvathira for me. I was never been asked if I were a Vaishnavite or Saivaite, before I left Kerala. I was also never been asked for my GOTHRA before I left Kerala. However, once I stepped outside Kerala, things were different. New world, new questions and a slightly different Hinduism than I knew it. With new festivals and new questions came new confusions! I learnt about sparring factions of Hindu sects, heard of different versions and stories about the same festival, and started wondering what is this 'Gothra' thing that they ask in temples when you need to do a pooja (it was name and nakshatra in Kerala)! I even realized that there are small pockets of such division exists right inside in Kerala, like the Gowda Sarawat Brahmins who are Vaishnavites! But while growing up in Kerala, I was busy cracking math, science and history and did not have much time for religious research. And I was oblivious to such deep divisions of Hinduism. Most of the answers came with some learning; Hinduism consists of several schools of thought and Vaishnavism is ONE OF THE principal divisions. Saivism and Shaktism are others. But it does not stop there , majority of us are influenced by Advaita philosophy, pray to an array of deities, considering all of them as manifestations of the supreme, Brahman. Hence, majority of us do not belong to any of the above divisions. Vaishnavism Vaishnavism adherents worship Vishnu or one of his avatars as the supreme God and are principally monotheistic in nature. The Hare Krishna movement or ISKCON is a modern example of a Vaishnavite organisation. Divisions of Vaishnava tradition Some of you will be surprised to know that there are sub-divisions in Vaishnava tradition itself. Major sub-divisions are, Vishishtaadvaita ("qualified nondualism"), espoused by Ramanuja; i.e., Srivaishnavism. Dvaita ("dualism"), espoused by Madhvacharya Achintya Bheda-Abheda, espoused by Sri Chaitanya adhered by Gaudiya Vaishnavism. ISKCON ("Hare Krishnas") is the most well known branch of this school. Shuddhaadvaita, espoused by Vallabhacharya Dvaitaadvaita, espoused by Nimbarka Vaishnava Belief Vaishnavas believe that Vishnu-Narayana is the one supreme God (Parabrahman) and all other living entities (including devas such as Shiva and Durga) are subservient to Him. While other schools like Advaitism encourage people to interpret the Vedas philosophically and metaphorically but not too literally, Vaishnavism stresses the literal meaning as primary and indirect meaning as secondary. For example, according to Vaishnava theology, atman is not Brahman and Moksha doesn't mean "union with God" but "eternal life in heaven". Good thing is that, with the entry of other religions into the Indian subcontinent, we became more united and the discriminations of Vaishnavism and Saivism turned more into intellectual arguments rather than mutually exclusive philosophies fighting each other. CONCLUSION So, in short, unless you belong to a small percentage distinct Vaishnava followers in Kerala like Gowda Saraswat Brahmins or you are initiated by a Guru to Vaishnavism, you do not have to think much about this confusing topic. Also if Krishnadaya or anyone else follow Vaishnavism, they are absolutely right to do so and tell you that they see Krishna as the only Supreme god head. Guruvayoor Temple As far I know Guruvayoor temple is not distinctly defined as a Vaishnava tradition temple anywhere. Guruvayoor was the temple of Samoothiris, and there is no such mention as Samoothiri's were being Vaishnavites or Shaivites. Also, Guruvayoor pooja routines were laid down by Adi Sankaracharya and he is considered as a re-incarnation of Siva. It is important to note that Sankaracharya was not a Saivite or Vaishnavite, but written bhajans like Bhaja Govindam and Shivnandalahari. Reasons for our uniqueness Geographically, Kerala is isolated from the rest of India and because of this fact, our culture is quite unique, and so is our Hinduism. Hence, I also do not agree when someone from outside Kerala tells me that we are not real Hindu's as we don't celebrate Deepavali or Holi! Regarding Gothra, well.. thats for another day! Please correct me of any errors, dear knowledgeable elders. Om Namo Narayanya: Sunil.guruvayur , KEERTHI KUMAR V MENON <keerthibai wrote:>> > Ohm Namo Bhagavathe Vasudevaya; Ohm Namo Narrayanaya> > Dear Krishnadaya and others,> > In kerala there is no difference between Vishnavates> or Saivates. Here all peoples worships in Siva and> vaishnava temples. Nobody is saying is saying we> worship only in vaishnava temple or in siva temple. > > Read Ramayana, you can see Rama worships siva in so> many places. I believe you must know about Ramaswaram> temple. > > The split between devotes of siva and vishnau is> created by ISKON now. The ISKON activates separates> devotees as Siva and Vaishnava.> > Why we have to argue ? We can call Gurauvayoorappan > > Ohm Namo Narrayanaya; Ohm Namo Bhagavathe vasudevaya> > Keerthi Kumar> > --- "K.V Gopalakrishna" gopalakrishna.kv wrote:> > > > > Dear Sri. Ganapathy Raman, Krishnadaya and others.> > Radhe Krishna.> > There seems to be a small wrong understanding about> the term"Vaishnava.". The term "Vaishnava" is> referred to also in many placesin Bhagavatam. It> means "the one who worships Vishnu". It is wrongto> assume that a socalled "Vaishnava" can only worship> Vishnu. VishnuHimself is said to be worshipping Lord> Siva in many places. So it isthe understanding of the> term "Vaishnava" makes all the difference.> > Kindly pardon me for the interference.> In humble devotion,> KVG.> > > > GANAPATHY RAMAN wrote: So according to Krishnadaya> only people who are Vaishnavites areexpected to visit > and worship Sri Guruvayurappan and when the mainDeity> plays prominent role sub deities don't hv much> importance.Thisseems to be a strange theory that only> Vaishnavites shuld visit Krishnatemples and Saivites> visit Siva temples and thereby distinquishing eventhe> very nature of God and splitting Him into two parts as> VaishnavaGod and Saiva God.Quite strange.There is no> necesiity for any argumentas this requires only> commonsense that all people who visit Krishnatemple at> Guruvayur are not Vaishnavites as Krishnadaya> mayimagine.They also worshiip Siva ,Sastha and other> deities ofSaivites.Why shuld God be baulkanised as> Vaishnava God and Saiva God?InSiva temples too we hv> vaishnava deities and all worship that and nodisputes.> > Krishnadaya must also understand that Narayaneeyam> might hv beenmade by Melpathur but the glory of the> same was spread allover Indiaand abroad by the late> Anantharama Deekshidar who was a doyen ofdiscourses> and when he was afflicted by illness he went to GVR> andworshipped Sri Krishna thru Narayaneeyam and in> course got his diseasecured and from then onwards> wherever he went for doing discourses hemade it a> point to discourse Narayaneeyam and by that only many> peoplecame to know even the existence of such a> hymn.Perhaps you may not beaware this fact.That is why> even his photo is adorned along withbhatthathiri in> GVR temple.He was not a vaishnava but an> ardentSaiva.So don't try to make your conclusion that> Sri > Guruvayurappan belongs to only people who are> Vaishanavites andall who visit the temple are> vaishnavas.That has stemmed from yourimagination.I am> not arguing with you as it is a waste I know asyou hv> a definite mind set up which can't accept other> things.This Imentioned even in my reply earlier.> > Just by writing a comment an ardent devotee of> Krishna won'tchange or get confused as you imagine and> if the devotee does the samethen he or she is not a> devotee of Sri Krishna.Arguments wll always bethere> and not necessarily be taken as a matter of conversion> from onesect to another sect.Just becoz the vaishnava> acharyas reject advaitafollowers of Sankara and others> can that argument be accepted and doyou think it has> any sanctity?This seems to be some conversion> theorynever believe advaita and only what vaishnava> acharyas said believethose things.Such things shuld> not hv been written as the same willonly confuse the> real bhakthas of Sri Krishna.who will get> theimpression of worshipping saivite Gods like Siva> and others are againstreligious spirit.You believe in> whatever things as I hv already said inmy earlier> reply that all depends on individuals perceptions> andconvictions.But ridiculing Sankara undoubtedly the> Greatest of alland praising only the vaishnava> acharyas is not the proper way ofpresenting the matter> and shows your immaturity only.You must hv the > broad vision to accept all things enunciated by all> the acharyasand not confining yourself in some shelf.> > Anyways there is no meaning to say to you who can't> hv the mindto accept the views of others also and> clinging to one particularthing and rejecting all the> other Great people who brought glory toIndia, is> simply futile.I hv never criticised Gita,Bhagavatham> and youimagine something as if I am trying to wean> away the devotees ofKrishna to some other sect.I am> not for any such move but definitelyyour writings show> you are on that path which is simply ridiculous> andpitiable.For your info I am not for Vaishnava sect> or Saiva sect as Ilove both sects > and worship the Gods of both sects and also a good> follower ofSri Guruvayurappan and I may hv my own> Ishta Devata and that ispersonal.> > Again I say I wrote the reply not to offend you> neither this oneor the previous one but only to make> you understand that you shuld hvmore broad views on > spiritual matters and not live like a frog in a> well.God Blessdear friend Krishnadaya. and don't get> agitated by this reply as I hvtold only the truth and> as an answer to your reply.Let us stop withthis as you> hv certain mind set which does not allow to make> yourthinking broader and you must accept the fact that> God is One whetherVaishnava God or Saiva God.> krishnadayawrote> > Krishna, Guruvayoorappa,> > It is not advisable to argue when someone questions> the > fundamental supreme authority of Sri Krishna as well> as His literary > incarnations and restricts the scope of discussion to> non-vaishnava > saints . As such, this write up is just to remove the> confusion in > the minds of Krishna-bhaktas who were disturbed by the> mentioned > distortion . > > When a Vaishnava goes to Guruvayoor temple , he/she> worships the > presiding Deity Guruvayoorappan as well as the> sub-deities therein > namely Siva, Ganesha , Bhagavathy and Ayyappan . As> such the > question of spiritual intolerance doesn't arise . > > Ishta-devatha is a term meaning "the God one prays> most." Sri > Krishna is the `Ishta-devatha of Vaishnavas for whom> focused Bhakti-> Yoga to Him is like life-air . > > Vaishnava authorites like Ramanuja , Madhava ,> Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, > Melpathur Naryana Bhattathiri ,and Prabhupada have> asked their > followers to remain steadfast in their Bhakri-yoga by> fully complying > with Bhagavan's instructions . In fact , these> Acharyas strongly > rejected the Maya-vadi philosophy of the Advaitists .> Accordingly, > the Vaishnavas are relying on specific scriptures like> Bhagavatham , > Gita and Narayaneeyam which have the stamp of approval> by Bhagavan > Krishna Himself . And Bhagavan provides His Devotees> with > opportunities and wisdom to understand the concepts of> the mentioned > scriptures . A designer has to comply with the> specified codes and > standards in order to produce an acceptable product .> Same way , a > Vaishnava complies with the eternal instructions of> Sri Krishna > without fail . There is no difference between Sri> Krishna , His His > attributes and His instructions . > > Bhagavad Gita is relevant for all ages . Even in this> Kali-yuga , > Gita guides it's followers in the right path. > > A humble servant of Guruvayoorappan . > > -------------------------> guruvayur ,GANAPATHY RAMAN> agraman62@ > wrote:> >> > This is only my thoughts and in no way be treated as> a rebuttal of > Krishnadayas postings as I hv already made known> Krishnadaya is a > devotee of Krishna and could not tolerate anything is> said other than > Krishna.But the fact is that Krishna is only one of> the eversomany > Gods in our Hindu mythology.Though His avatar was> different from > others and He preached Gita it becomes easier to quote> from what He > said.My point is then what abt other Gods and their> followers who > also get the same benefits which Krishna> promised.Krishna told only > arjuna in a battlefield His teachings.Following the> same in all > circumstances won't lead us > > in the present age as many of them are not> practicable.Hetaught > arjuna only to surrender to Him and fight the war> instead of running > out of the battle field and do the duty of a> Kshatriya.So just > banking only on Gita alone for all the ills of the> society won't help > much,I think.The teachings happened abt 4 or 5000> years ago in a > different yuga and applying all the tenets in the> present age will > lead only to confusion.This does not mean I challenge> Krsihnadaya but > her wordings used seem to be not correct,I feel.> > > > Krishnadaya uses that jnanis is also devotees and> there arise > duality and such things.She harps on devotion and> diluting the same > amounts to absurdity.May be she is correct.But how> devotion comes?Is > it by seeing a Deity or by reading some texts or Gita?> She > elaborately quoted from Bhagavatam.Just becoz this> Group is dedicated > Sri Guruvayoorappan is it a must that one shuld quote> only > > from Gita,Bhagavatam and Narayaneeyam.Is there> anycompulsion.Or > the scriptures mean only these three.Then what abt> Nayanmars who are > 64 in number who worshipped Siva and made lot of hymns> in praise of > Him.Are they not followers or devotees?Sankara ,an> acknowledged > advaitin wrote Saundarya > > Lahiri,a beautiful celestial song on Devi shuld be> ignored?He was > no doubt a> > Realised soul and he never wrote that hymn for> himself as there > was no necessity for him as when one merged in the God> there is no > dualism but all can't become like him and hence he> coined so many > hymns on Devi ,Ananda Lahiri on Siva,Bhaja Govindam on> > Krishna,Subrahmanya bhujangam on Subrahmanya and there> was no > necesiity for him to do all those things when he knew> he was only > writing the same on himself being one with God but for> the > > other mortals like Krishnadaya and me to develop the> bhakthy > marga so that people like us can recite the same and> try to evolve > ourselves in the ladder of bhakthy.> > So too Ramakrishna Paramahansa worshipped Kali and> got her vision > and thru Her Grace got all the knowledge though he did> not study much > abt the scriptures and other things but becoz of the> Grace he could > quote so many teachings.The same thing is with sage> Ramana who took a > different path by > > having his own theory to find out whatwas he and> thru 'atma > vichara' he dived within himself and found that he was> also a speck > of the Creator.All Realised souls or jnanis though> initially they hv > to be bhakthas of some deitiy and thru severe> austerities and > spiritual discipline were able to merge in the Cosmic> Power and there > was no necessity for them to become a devotee again as> they hv > crossed that stage and when they had realised that all> are ONE then > who shuld be a devotee for whom?As we were having the> same problem > earlier I mentioned that the river is a river by name> only so long > the same reaches the ocean and when the same merges> with the ocean > then the identity of the river is lost and do you want> to say that > the ocean is a devotee of the river or vice versa when> the river has > already become one with the ocean?> > As I don't hv much knowledge abt sastras I can't> comment on > that.But how many sastras you know and do you know the> meaning of > what they import to the understanding of common people> like me.We > always hv readymade answer that such and such thing is> said in > sastras,Krishna has said such things in Gita,> > Bhagavatham says such and such things and so we> shuld follow.Then > are we not becoming something like a robot without> really > understanding and try to improve our own knowledge?For> anything and > everything we depend on some texts mean we just> surrender our God > given intelligence and wisdom to those quotes.Don' you> think so?Why > man is given intelligence and wisdom?To use it > > in a way that he or she shuld be able to study and> try to > understand both the aspects positive and negative and> the > applicability of the same in the times we live in and> not moving back > to several thousand years .We shuld try to study those> things and > also use our own versions and realise the reality> according to > change of times.What Gita says or Bhagavatham says> need not > necessarily be followed literally but one must use> one's senses and > try to intrepret > > according to needs.In the whole of the world how> many people are > real Krishna devotees?doyou think that you can make> the whole world > one of Krishna Conscious stage? I hv to ask you this> questions not > out of showing that I am greater than you in knowledge> or to show > some sort of ego complex which Idon't > > possess but your wordings are such which I can't> digest.Hence > this staright > > questions not to wound you but harping on one> subject only we > can't develop bhakthy but making ourselves adjusting> to the thoughts > of others only thru > > pursuasion one must try to make others realise the> facts that > contain in our > > statements.If you would hv covered all the aspects> of all deities > and all types of > > devotees of other deities then I would hv certainly> appreciated > you.But instead of that you chose the path of jnanis> and making that > others think devotion as absurdity are not in any way> ethical and it > shows some type of assertation that people who worship> other deities > and who got knowlede by worshipping their own deities> other than > Krishna are not devotees or bhakthas and attacking> jnanis are not the > proper way.Anyway you or I are not jnanis and then how> can we make > comment on them and no janni says thatyou hv to accept> his versions > only including Krishna who also distinguishes bhakthas> into four > categories.> > > > Your following of Krishna and your concern for Him> is laudable > but the way you hv presented is not palatable at least> to me.There > are so many saints who worship eversomany deities for> years and when > their karmic effects are over they > > get themselves merged in the Oneness and there is no> rebirth for > them and they need not come back again to hv more> experiences as even > Sri Krishna has said in Gita.Such souls are rarely> found and they > never exhibit themselves.So there is no more devotion> is required for > them as they hv become one with the Creator.> > Till we reach that time some following or devotion> of somebody is > a must and I used to say when one chooses one deity> one shuld cling > on to that.Then how bhakthy comes?Not from birth but> when the child > grows and the parents take the child to temples and> say good things > and the same shuld get imbibed in the mind of the> child and then it > will grow automatically over the years.Now a days how> many children > are taught bhakthy by their parents?Teaching Gita and> other things > can takeplace when the child grows up sufficiently> advanced and you > can't expect a child of even 10 to grasp what Krishna> said in > Gita.All those things> > can come only at a later part of time as Dr.Saroja> Ramanujam has > pointed in> > another mail.Till then the child will be more> interested in his > or her studies andto> > come out successfully in life and at that time if> you go on > teaching Gita and other things they will even lose> what little > interest they hv got.Even during Krishnas' time or> subsequent times > how many people knew Gita nobody knows.Actually I came> to get some > interest in Gita only after hearing a 'Gita Yagna'> which the late > Swami Chinmayanada used to conduct and I was attracted> by his > language,erudition,the wayhe used to pronounce the> subject in avery > lucid manner.So expecting too much and quoting Gita> and Bhagavatam > may be ok for a group but in real life I wonder how> far the same will > attract persons.Of course in all discourses people may> throng as > their is no dearth for people in thiscountry > > anywhere but afterwards what happen to them and> whether they > follow the teachings or just ignore and appreciate> only the > scholorlypresentation of the > > lecturer we don't know.> > Dear Krishna,if any of my sentences hv the effect of> wounding > your feelings kindly bear with me as it is not my> intention to offend > you in any manner.You wrote something and just I> countered that is > all.Since this will make other members also to take> part in a new > twist to the points I hv put some questions which> sometimes you may > find the same difficult to answer.So with all the> articles,as > putting questions is easy but to give a convincing> reply is difficult.> > Again I beg your excuses if you feel in anyway> offended by my > writings as I hv always treated you as my good> friend.Also I say I > am not against Bhagavatam,> > Gita and other scriptures but much dependence on the> sayings > won't help in the present day world as what Krishna> preached was > under different circumstances though they may be> applicable in some > cases and not in all respects.> > > > Hare Krishna,> > > > agraman.> > > > > > > > > > Here's a new way to find what you're looking for -> Answers> >> > > > > > > > > Here's a new way to find what you're looking for -> Answers > > > > > > > > > > > Get on board. You're invited to try the new Mail Beta. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2006 Report Share Posted August 10, 2006 Syamalaji, Why go that far? Sankara only made the "Bhaja Govindam". Sankara has made the Bhashyam of Vishnu-sahasranamam It is said that Sankara really wanted to do the Bhashyam of Lalitha Sahasranamam and he told Padma-pada to bring Lalitha Sahasranamam. It is said that he brought it three times, and all the three times, when it reached Sankara's hands, it was Vishnu Sahasranamam. Sankara could guess what the Lord wanted, and wrote the Bhashyam on Vishnu Sahasranamam. Regards KVG Syamala Nair wrote: Dear Shri Gopalakrishnaji Thank you very much for giving your comments in a nutshell and very simple to understand. I also believe that when God created the universe he did not make any divisions like Vaishnavites, Saivites etc. It was all man made. Ofcourse I agree that there should be an Ishta Devatha for anyone and it can be Vishnu, Siva , Devi, Murugan, Ganapthi etc. I had heard that Shree Sankaracharya was a great devotee of Lord Siva, but he also worhsipped Devi and Vishnu. It seems he wrote a stotram called "Shree Lakshmi Narasimha Stotram" praising Lord Guruvayoorappan to get rid of the Samsara dukham. Also I read in some books that if we do not know the diety in a particular temple, we can always pray taking the name of our Ishta devata. As mentioned by you, "The Supreme One has no form and since we cannot focus our mind on a formless God, we select an Ishta Devata whose form and manifestation we like most and worship him. Irrespective of whom we worship , the result we will be getting will depend on how devoted and pure our mind is while doing the prayer If I am wrong in my interpretation, please correct me as I do not have much knowledge on this. Sincerely Syamala "K.V Gopalakrishna" <gopalakrishna.kv > wrote: Dear Sunil and others, Radhe Krishna! A real Bhakta need not worry about Advaita, Dwaita, visishta-advaita, Jainism, Buddhism, etc. All these divisions do not help in any way except dividing us. As we all know, Brahman, God without form, otherwise known as the "Whole Indivisible " is unique and without a second. Then why break our head with all these petty sub-divisions? Show real Bhakti to God, whoever is your favourite God, Your Ishta-deivatam. Dont worry about your Gotram etc. We are all human beings. If some temple priest asks your Gotram and if you dont know your Gotram, tell the name of your Ishta-devatam. Gotram is really the name of the ancient Rishi from whom one has had his origin. It is not necessary that one should remember that name all the time. That is why I said, tell the name of your Ishta-deivatam. All these so-called divisions in faith stated above, are only in the level of the different mutts and the mata-adhipathis who head the mutts. Let us leave it to the mata-adhipathis to sort it out. Mata-adhipathis should work together to unify our religion. I am sorry to say that by following these different faiths, we only divide ourselves. So let us not be carried away by any of these. We hindus worship all Gods. When we worship Vishnu, we are Vaishnavites, devotees of Vishnu, and when we worship Siva, we are Saivites, devotees of Siva. When we worship Muruga, let us call ourselves Muruga-bhaktas. In fact, all these Gods are but manifestations of the Supreme one. As the Supreme One has no form and one cannot focus his mind on a formless God, we have selected as Ishta-devatams, the form of the manifestation whom we like most, and worship him. .. I feel I am quite clear in my thinking, and this is the philosophy I like to adhere to. Regards, Yours, in humble submission, K.V. Gopalakrishna.. Sunil Menon wrote: Dear all, This is an interesting but confusing topic for many of us. Two years ago I was confused with the topic and I was compelled to do some research and talk with many Hindu scholars and teachers including a few Swamiji's from Kerala regarding the subject. It is not really a confusing subject after I learnt the facts. First of all, everyone is right! Yes, from your own view points - because there is no common view point. However, if I can speak of majority of Hindu's in Kerala, I agree with Keerthi Kumar. Here is my research that gives you a wider view to decide for yourself- I never celebrated Deepavali or Holi in Kerala, it was Onam, Vishu and Thiruvathira for me. I was never been asked if I were a Vaishnavite or Saivaite, before I left Kerala. I was also never been asked for my GOTHRA before I left Kerala. However, once I stepped outside Kerala, things were different. New world, new questions and a slightly different Hinduism than I knew it. With new festivals and new questions came new confusions! I learnt about sparring factions of Hindu sects, heard of different versions and stories about the same festival, and started wondering what is this 'Gothra' thing that they ask in temples when you need to do a pooja (it was name and nakshatra in Kerala)! I even realized that there are small pockets of such division exists right inside in Kerala, like the Gowda Sarawat Brahmins who are Vaishnavites! But while growing up in Kerala, I was busy cracking math, science and history and did not have much time for religious research. And I was oblivious to such deep divisions of Hinduism. Most of the answers came with some learning; Hinduism consists of several schools of thought and Vaishnavism is ONE OF THE principal divisions. Saivism and Shaktism are others. But it does not stop there , majority of us are influenced by Advaita philosophy, pray to an array of deities, considering all of them as manifestations of the supreme, Brahman. Hence, majority of us do not belong to any of the above divisions. Vaishnavism Vaishnavism adherents worship Vishnu or one of his avatars as the supreme God and are principally monotheistic in nature. The Hare Krishna movement or ISKCON is a modern example of a Vaishnavite organisation. Divisions of Vaishnava tradition Some of you will be surprised to know that there are sub-divisions in Vaishnava tradition itself. Major sub-divisions are, Vishishtaadvaita ("qualified nondualism"), espoused by Ramanuja; i.e., Srivaishnavism. Dvaita ("dualism"), espoused by Madhvacharya Achintya Bheda-Abheda, espoused by Sri Chaitanya adhered by Gaudiya Vaishnavism. ISKCON ("Hare Krishnas") is the most well known branch of this school. Shuddhaadvaita, espoused by Vallabhacharya Dvaitaadvaita, espoused by Nimbarka Vaishnava Belief Vaishnavas believe that Vishnu-Narayana is the one supreme God (Parabrahman) and all other living entities (including devas such as Shiva and Durga) are subservient to Him. While other schools like Advaitism encourage people to interpret the Vedas philosophically and metaphorically but not too literally, Vaishnavism stresses the literal meaning as primary and indirect meaning as secondary. For example, according to Vaishnava theology, atman is not Brahman and Moksha doesn't mean "union with God" but "eternal life in heaven". Good thing is that, with the entry of other religions into the Indian subcontinent, we became more united and the discriminations of Vaishnavism and Saivism turned more into intellectual arguments rather than mutually exclusive philosophies fighting each other. CONCLUSION So, in short, unless you belong to a small percentage distinct Vaishnava followers in Kerala like Gowda Saraswat Brahmins or you are initiated by a Guru to Vaishnavism, you do not have to think much about this confusing topic. Also if Krishnadaya or anyone else follow Vaishnavism, they are absolutely right to do so and tell you that they see Krishna as the only Supreme god head. Guruvayoor Temple As far I know Guruvayoor temple is not distinctly defined as a Vaishnava tradition temple anywhere. Guruvayoor was the temple of Samoothiris, and there is no such mention as Samoothiri's were being Vaishnavites or Shaivites. Also, Guruvayoor pooja routines were laid down by Adi Sankaracharya and he is considered as a re-incarnation of Siva. It is important to note that Sankaracharya was not a Saivite or Vaishnavite, but written bhajans like Bhaja Govindam and Shivnandalahari. Reasons for our uniqueness Geographically, Kerala is isolated from the rest of India and because of this fact, our culture is quite unique, and so is our Hinduism. Hence, I also do not agree when someone from outside Kerala tells me that we are not real Hindu's as we don't celebrate Deepavali or Holi! Regarding Gothra, well.. thats for another day! Please correct me of any errors, dear knowledgeable elders. Om Namo Narayanya: Sunil. guruvayur , KEERTHI KUMAR V MENON <keerthibai wrote: > > > Ohm Namo Bhagavathe Vasudevaya; Ohm Namo Narrayanaya > > Dear Krishnadaya and others, > > In kerala there is no difference between Vishnavates > or Saivates. Here all peoples worships in Siva and > vaishnava temples. Nobody is saying is saying we > worship only in vaishnava temple or in siva temple. > > Read Ramayana, you can see Rama worships siva in so > many places. I believe you must know about Ramaswaram > temple. > > The split between devotes of siva and vishnau is > created by ISKON now. The ISKON activates separates > devotees as Siva and Vaishnava. > > Why we have to argue ? We can call Gurauvayoorappan > > Ohm Namo Narrayanaya; Ohm Namo Bhagavathe vasudevaya > > Keerthi Kumar > > --- "K.V Gopalakrishna" gopalakrishna.kv > wrote: > > > > > Dear Sri. Ganapathy Raman, Krishnadaya and others. > > Radhe Krishna. > > There seems to be a small wrong understanding about > the term"Vaishnava.". The term "Vaishnava" is > referred to also in many placesin Bhagavatam. It > means "the one who worships Vishnu". It is wrongto > assume that a socalled "Vaishnava" can only worship > Vishnu. VishnuHimself is said to be worshipping Lord > Siva in many places. So it isthe understanding of the > term "Vaishnava" makes all the difference. > > Kindly pardon me for the interference. > In humble devotion, > KVG. > > > > GANAPATHY RAMAN wrote: So according to Krishnadaya > only people who are Vaishnavites areexpected to visit > and worship Sri Guruvayurappan and when the mainDeity > plays prominent role sub deities don't hv much > importance.Thisseems to be a strange theory that only > Vaishnavites shuld visit Krishnatemples and Saivites > visit Siva temples and thereby distinquishing eventhe > very nature of God and splitting Him into two parts as > VaishnavaGod and Saiva God.Quite strange.There is no > necesiity for any argumentas this requires only > commonsense that all people who visit Krishnatemple at > Guruvayur are not Vaishnavites as Krishnadaya > mayimagine.They also worshiip Siva ,Sastha and other > deities ofSaivites.Why shuld God be baulkanised as > Vaishnava God and Saiva God?InSiva temples too we hv > vaishnava deities and all worship that and nodisputes. > > Krishnadaya must also understand that Narayaneeyam > might hv beenmade by Melpathur but the glory of the > same was spread allover Indiaand abroad by the late > Anantharama Deekshidar who was a doyen ofdiscourses > and when he was afflicted by illness he went to GVR > andworshipped Sri Krishna thru Narayaneeyam and in > course got his diseasecured and from then onwards > wherever he went for doing discourses hemade it a > point to discourse Narayaneeyam and by that only many > peoplecame to know even the existence of such a > hymn.Perhaps you may not beaware this fact.That is why > even his photo is adorned along withbhatthathiri in > GVR temple.He was not a vaishnava but an > ardentSaiva.So don't try to make your conclusion that > Sri > Guruvayurappan belongs to only people who are > Vaishanavites andall who visit the temple are > vaishnavas.That has stemmed from yourimagination.I am > not arguing with you as it is a waste I know asyou hv > a definite mind set up which can't accept other > things.This Imentioned even in my reply earlier. > > Just by writing a comment an ardent devotee of > Krishna won'tchange or get confused as you imagine and > if the devotee does the samethen he or she is not a > devotee of Sri Krishna.Arguments wll always bethere > and not necessarily be taken as a matter of conversion > from onesect to another sect.Just becoz the vaishnava > acharyas reject advaitafollowers of Sankara and others > can that argument be accepted and doyou think it has > any sanctity?This seems to be some conversion > theorynever believe advaita and only what vaishnava > acharyas said believethose things.Such things shuld > not hv been written as the same willonly confuse the > real bhakthas of Sri Krishna.who will get > theimpression of worshipping saivite Gods like Siva > and others are againstreligious spirit.You believe in > whatever things as I hv already said inmy earlier > reply that all depends on individuals perceptions > andconvictions.But ridiculing Sankara undoubtedly the > Greatest of alland praising only the vaishnava > acharyas is not the proper way ofpresenting the matter > and shows your immaturity only.You must hv the > broad vision to accept all things enunciated by all > the acharyasand not confining yourself in some shelf. > > Anyways there is no meaning to say to you who can't > hv the mindto accept the views of others also and > clinging to one particularthing and rejecting all the > other Great people who brought glory toIndia, is > simply futile.I hv never criticised Gita,Bhagavatham > and youimagine something as if I am trying to wean > away the devotees ofKrishna to some other sect.I am > not for any such move but definitelyyour writings show > you are on that path which is simply ridiculous > andpitiable.For your info I am not for Vaishnava sect > or Saiva sect as Ilove both sects > and worship the Gods of both sects and also a good > follower ofSri Guruvayurappan and I may hv my own > Ishta Devata and that ispersonal. > > Again I say I wrote the reply not to offend you > neither this oneor the previous one but only to make > you understand that you shuld hvmore broad views on > spiritual matters and not live like a frog in a > well.God Blessdear friend Krishnadaya. and don't get > agitated by this reply as I hvtold only the truth and > as an answer to your reply.Let us stop withthis as you > hv certain mind set which does not allow to make > yourthinking broader and you must accept the fact that > God is One whetherVaishnava God or Saiva God. > krishnadayawrote > > Krishna, Guruvayoorappa, > > It is not advisable to argue when someone questions > the > fundamental supreme authority of Sri Krishna as well > as His literary > incarnations and restricts the scope of discussion to > non-vaishnava > saints . As such, this write up is just to remove the > confusion in > the minds of Krishna-bhaktas who were disturbed by the > mentioned > distortion . > > When a Vaishnava goes to Guruvayoor temple , he/she > worships the > presiding Deity Guruvayoorappan as well as the > sub-deities therein > namely Siva, Ganesha , Bhagavathy and Ayyappan . As > such the > question of spiritual intolerance doesn't arise . > > Ishta-devatha is a term meaning "the God one prays > most." Sri > Krishna is the `Ishta-devatha of Vaishnavas for whom > focused Bhakti- > Yoga to Him is like life-air . > > Vaishnava authorites like Ramanuja , Madhava , > Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, > Melpathur Naryana Bhattathiri ,and Prabhupada have > asked their > followers to remain steadfast in their Bhakri-yoga by > fully complying > with Bhagavan's instructions . In fact , these > Acharyas strongly > rejected the Maya-vadi philosophy of the Advaitists . > Accordingly, > the Vaishnavas are relying on specific scriptures like > Bhagavatham , > Gita and Narayaneeyam which have the stamp of approval > by Bhagavan > Krishna Himself . And Bhagavan provides His Devotees > with > opportunities and wisdom to understand the concepts of > the mentioned > scriptures . A designer has to comply with the > specified codes and > standards in order to produce an acceptable product . > Same way , a > Vaishnava complies with the eternal instructions of > Sri Krishna > without fail . There is no difference between Sri > Krishna , His His > attributes and His instructions . > > Bhagavad Gita is relevant for all ages . Even in this > Kali-yuga , > Gita guides it's followers in the right path. > > A humble servant of Guruvayoorappan . > > ------------------------- > guruvayur ,GANAPATHY RAMAN > agraman62@ > wrote: > > > > This is only my thoughts and in no way be treated as > a rebuttal of > Krishnadayas postings as I hv already made known > Krishnadaya is a > devotee of Krishna and could not tolerate anything is > said other than > Krishna.But the fact is that Krishna is only one of > the eversomany > Gods in our Hindu mythology.Though His avatar was > different from > others and He preached Gita it becomes easier to quote > from what He > said.My point is then what abt other Gods and their > followers who > also get the same benefits which Krishna > promised.Krishna told only > arjuna in a battlefield His teachings.Following the > same in all > circumstances won't lead us > > in the present age as many of them are not > practicable.Hetaught > arjuna only to surrender to Him and fight the war > instead of running > out of the battle field and do the duty of a > Kshatriya.So just > banking only on Gita alone for all the ills of the > society won't help > much,I think.The teachings happened abt 4 or 5000 > years ago in a > different yuga and applying all the tenets in the > present age will > lead only to confusion.This does not mean I challenge > Krsihnadaya but > her wordings used seem to be not correct,I feel. > > > > Krishnadaya uses that jnanis is also devotees and > there arise > duality and such things.She harps on devotion and > diluting the same > amounts to absurdity.May be she is correct.But how > devotion comes?Is > it by seeing a Deity or by reading some texts or Gita? > She > elaborately quoted from Bhagavatam.Just becoz this > Group is dedicated > Sri Guruvayoorappan is it a must that one shuld quote > only > > from Gita,Bhagavatam and Narayaneeyam.Is there > anycompulsion.Or > the scriptures mean only these three.Then what abt > Nayanmars who are > 64 in number who worshipped Siva and made lot of hymns > in praise of > Him.Are they not followers or devotees?Sankara ,an > acknowledged > advaitin wrote Saundarya > > Lahiri,a beautiful celestial song on Devi shuld be > ignored?He was > no doubt a > > Realised soul and he never wrote that hymn for > himself as there > was no necessity for him as when one merged in the God > there is no > dualism but all can't become like him and hence he > coined so many > hymns on Devi ,Ananda Lahiri on Siva,Bhaja Govindam on > > Krishna,Subrahmanya bhujangam on Subrahmanya and there > was no > necesiity for him to do all those things when he knew > he was only > writing the same on himself being one with God but for > the > > other mortals like Krishnadaya and me to develop the > bhakthy > marga so that people like us can recite the same and > try to evolve > ourselves in the ladder of bhakthy. > > So too Ramakrishna Paramahansa worshipped Kali and > got her vision > and thru Her Grace got all the knowledge though he did > not study much > abt the scriptures and other things but becoz of the > Grace he could > quote so many teachings.The same thing is with sage > Ramana who took a > different path by > > having his own theory to find out whatwas he and > thru 'atma > vichara' he dived within himself and found that he was > also a speck > of the Creator.All Realised souls or jnanis though > initially they hv > to be bhakthas of some deitiy and thru severe > austerities and > spiritual discipline were able to merge in the Cosmic > Power and there > was no necessity for them to become a devotee again as > they hv > crossed that stage and when they had realised that all > are ONE then > who shuld be a devotee for whom?As we were having the > same problem > earlier I mentioned that the river is a river by name > only so long > the same reaches the ocean and when the same merges > with the ocean > then the identity of the river is lost and do you want > to say that > the ocean is a devotee of the river or vice versa when > the river has > already become one with the ocean? > > As I don't hv much knowledge abt sastras I can't > comment on > that.But how many sastras you know and do you know the > meaning of > what they import to the understanding of common people > like me.We > always hv readymade answer that such and such thing is > said in > sastras,Krishna has said such things in Gita, > > Bhagavatham says such and such things and so we > shuld follow.Then > are we not becoming something like a robot without > really > understanding and try to improve our own knowledge?For > anything and > everything we depend on some texts mean we just > surrender our God > given intelligence and wisdom to those quotes.Don' you > think so?Why > man is given intelligence and wisdom?To use it > > in a way that he or she shuld be able to study and > try to > understand both the aspects positive and negative and > the > applicability of the same in the times we live in and > not moving back > to several thousand years .We shuld try to study those > things and > also use our own versions and realise the reality > according to > change of times.What Gita says or Bhagavatham says > need not > necessarily be followed literally but one must use > one's senses and > try to intrepret > > according to needs.In the whole of the world how > many people are > real Krishna devotees?doyou think that you can make > the whole world > one of Krishna Conscious stage? I hv to ask you this > questions not > out of showing that I am greater than you in knowledge > or to show > some sort of ego complex which Idon't > > possess but your wordings are such which I can't > digest.Hence > this staright > > questions not to wound you but harping on one > subject only we > can't develop bhakthy but making ourselves adjusting > to the thoughts > of others only thru > > pursuasion one must try to make others realise the > facts that > contain in our > > statements.If you would hv covered all the aspects > of all deities > and all types of > > devotees of other deities then I would hv certainly > appreciated > you.But instead of that you chose the path of jnanis > and making that > others think devotion as absurdity are not in any way > ethical and it > shows some type of assertation that people who worship > other deities > and who got knowlede by worshipping their own deities > other than > Krishna are not devotees or bhakthas and attacking > jnanis are not the > proper way.Anyway you or I are not jnanis and then how > can we make > comment on them and no janni says thatyou hv to accept > his versions > only including Krishna who also distinguishes bhakthas > into four > categories. > > > > Your following of Krishna and your concern for Him > is laudable > but the way you hv presented is not palatable at least > to me.There > are so many saints who worship eversomany deities for > years and when > their karmic effects are over they > > get themselves merged in the Oneness and there is no > rebirth for > them and they need not come back again to hv more > experiences as even > Sri Krishna has said in Gita.Such souls are rarely > found and they > never exhibit themselves.So there is no more devotion > is required for > them as they hv become one with the Creator. > > Till we reach that time some following or devotion > of somebody is > a must and I used to say when one chooses one deity > one shuld cling > on to that.Then how bhakthy comes?Not from birth but > when the child > grows and the parents take the child to temples and > say good things > and the same shuld get imbibed in the mind of the > child and then it > will grow automatically over the years.Now a days how > many children > are taught bhakthy by their parents?Teaching Gita and > other things > can takeplace when the child grows up sufficiently > advanced and you > can't expect a child of even 10 to grasp what Krishna > said in > Gita.All those things > > can come only at a later part of time as Dr.Saroja > Ramanujam has > pointed in > > another mail.Till then the child will be more > interested in his > or her studies andto > > come out successfully in life and at that time if > you go on > teaching Gita and other things they will even lose > what little > interest they hv got.Even during Krishnas' time or > subsequent times > how many people knew Gita nobody knows.Actually I came > to get some > interest in Gita only after hearing a 'Gita Yagna' > which the late > Swami Chinmayanada used to conduct and I was attracted > by his > language,erudition,the wayhe used to pronounce the > subject in avery > lucid manner.So expecting too much and quoting Gita > and Bhagavatam > may be ok for a group but in real life I wonder how > far the same will > attract persons.Of course in all discourses people may > throng as > their is no dearth for people in thiscountry > > anywhere but afterwards what happen to them and > whether they > follow the teachings or just ignore and appreciate > only the > scholorlypresentation of the > > lecturer we don't know. > > Dear Krishna,if any of my sentences hv the effect of > wounding > your feelings kindly bear with me as it is not my > intention to offend > you in any manner.You wrote something and just I > countered that is > all.Since this will make other members also to take > part in a new > twist to the points I hv put some questions which > sometimes you may > find the same difficult to answer.So with all the > articles,as > putting questions is easy but to give a convincing > reply is difficult. > > Again I beg your excuses if you feel in anyway > offended by my > writings as I hv always treated you as my good > friend.Also I say I > am not against Bhagavatam, > > Gita and other scriptures but much dependence on the > sayings > won't help in the present day world as what Krishna > preached was > under different circumstances though they may be > applicable in some > cases and not in all respects. > > > > Hare Krishna, > > > > agraman. > > > > > > > > > > Here's a new way to find what you're looking for - > Answers > > > > > > > > > > > Here's a new way to find what you're looking for - > Answers > > > > > > > > > > > Get on board. You're invited to try the new Mail Beta. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 11, 2006 Report Share Posted August 11, 2006 Dear Shri Gopalakrishnaji Thank you very much for this valuable information Sincerely Syamala"K.V Gopalakrishna" <gopalakrishna.kv wrote: Syamalaji,Why go that far? Sankara only made the "Bhaja Govindam". Sankara has made the Bhashyam of Vishnu-sahasranamam It is said that Sankara really wanted to do the Bhashyam of Lalitha Sahasranamam and he told Padma-pada to bring Lalitha Sahasranamam. It is said that he brought it three times, and all the three times, when it reached Sankara's hands, it was Vishnu Sahasranamam. Sankara could guess what the Lord wanted, and wrote the Bhashyam on Vishnu Sahasranamam.RegardsKVGSyamala Nair wrote: Dear Shri Gopalakrishnaji Thank you very much for giving your comments in a nutshell and very simple to understand. I also believe that when God created the universe he did not make any divisions like Vaishnavites, Saivites etc. It was all man made. Ofcourse I agree that there should be an Ishta Devatha for anyone and it can be Vishnu, Siva , Devi, Murugan, Ganapthi etc. I had heard that Shree Sankaracharya was a great devotee of Lord Siva, but he also worhsipped Devi and Vishnu. It seems he wrote a stotram called "Shree Lakshmi Narasimha Stotram" praising Lord Guruvayoorappan to get rid of the Samsara dukham. Also I read in some books that if we do not know the diety in a particular temple, we can always pray taking the name of our Ishta devata. As mentioned by you, "The Supreme One has no form and since we cannot focus our mind on a formless God, we select an Ishta Devata whose form and manifestation we like most and worship him. Irrespective of whom we worship , the result we will be getting will depend on how devoted and pure our mind is while doing the prayer If I am wrong in my interpretation, please correct me as I do not have much knowledge on this. Sincerely Syamala"K.V Gopalakrishna" <gopalakrishna.kv > wrote: Dear Sunil and others,Radhe Krishna!A real Bhakta need not worry about Advaita, Dwaita, visishta-advaita, Jainism, Buddhism, etc. All these divisions do not help in any way except dividing us. As we all know, Brahman, God without form, otherwise known as the "Whole Indivisible " is unique and without a second. Then why break our head with all these petty sub-divisions? Show real Bhakti to God, whoever is your favourite God, Your Ishta-deivatam. Dont worry about your Gotram etc. We are all human beings. If some temple priest asks your Gotram and if you dont know your Gotram, tell the name of your Ishta-devatam. Gotram is really the name of the ancient Rishi from whom one has had his origin. It is not necessary that one should remember that name all the time. That is why I said, tell the name of your Ishta-deivatam.All these so-called divisions in faith stated above, are only in the level of the different mutts and the mata-adhipathis who head the mutts. Let us leave it to the mata-adhipathis to sort it out. Mata-adhipathis should work together to unify our religion. I am sorry to say that by following these different faiths, we only divide ourselves. So let us not be carried away by any of these. We hindus worship all Gods. When we worship Vishnu, we are Vaishnavites, devotees of Vishnu, and when we worship Siva, we are Saivites, devotees of Siva. When we worship Muruga, let us call ourselves Muruga-bhaktas. In fact, all these Gods are but manifestations of the Supreme one. As the Supreme One has no form and one cannot focus his mind on a formless God, we have selected as Ishta-devatams, the form of the manifestation whom we like most, and worship him. .. I feel I am quite clear in my thinking, and this is the philosophy I like to adhere to.Regards,Yours, in humble submission,K.V. Gopalakrishna..Sunil Menon wrote: Dear all, This is an interesting but confusing topic for many of us. Two years ago I was confused with the topic and I was compelled to do some research and talk with many Hindu scholars and teachers including a few Swamiji's from Kerala regarding the subject. It is not really a confusing subject after I learnt the facts. First of all, everyone is right! Yes, from your own view points - because there is no common view point. However, if I can speak of majority of Hindu's in Kerala, I agree with Keerthi Kumar. Here is my research that gives you a wider view to decide for yourself- I never celebrated Deepavali or Holi in Kerala, it was Onam, Vishu and Thiruvathira for me. I was never been asked if I were a Vaishnavite or Saivaite, before I left Kerala. I was also never been asked for my GOTHRA before I left Kerala. However, once I stepped outside Kerala, things were different. New world, new questions and a slightly different Hinduism than I knew it. With new festivals and new questions came new confusions! I learnt about sparring factions of Hindu sects, heard of different versions and stories about the same festival, and started wondering what is this 'Gothra' thing that they ask in temples when you need to do a pooja (it was name and nakshatra in Kerala)! I even realized that there are small pockets of such division exists right inside in Kerala, like the Gowda Sarawat Brahmins who are Vaishnavites! But while growing up in Kerala, I was busy cracking math, science and history and did not have much time for religious research. And I was oblivious to such deep divisions of Hinduism. Most of the answers came with some learning; Hinduism consists of several schools of thought and Vaishnavism is ONE OF THE principal divisions. Saivism and Shaktism are others. But it does not stop there , majority of us are influenced by Advaita philosophy, pray to an array of deities, considering all of them as manifestations of the supreme, Brahman. Hence, majority of us do not belong to any of the above divisions. Vaishnavism Vaishnavism adherents worship Vishnu or one of his avatars as the supreme God and are principally monotheistic in nature. The Hare Krishna movement or ISKCON is a modern example of a Vaishnavite organisation. Divisions of Vaishnava tradition Some of you will be surprised to know that there are sub-divisions in Vaishnava tradition itself. Major sub-divisions are, Vishishtaadvaita ("qualified nondualism"), espoused by Ramanuja; i.e., Srivaishnavism. Dvaita ("dualism"), espoused by Madhvacharya Achintya Bheda-Abheda, espoused by Sri Chaitanya adhered by Gaudiya Vaishnavism. ISKCON ("Hare Krishnas") is the most well known branch of this school. Shuddhaadvaita, espoused by Vallabhacharya Dvaitaadvaita, espoused by Nimbarka Vaishnava Belief Vaishnavas believe that Vishnu-Narayana is the one supreme God (Parabrahman) and all other living entities (including devas such as Shiva and Durga) are subservient to Him. While other schools like Advaitism encourage people to interpret the Vedas philosophically and metaphorically but not too literally, Vaishnavism stresses the literal meaning as primary and indirect meaning as secondary. For example, according to Vaishnava theology, atman is not Brahman and Moksha doesn't mean "union with God" but "eternal life in heaven". Good thing is that, with the entry of other religions into the Indian subcontinent, we became more united and the discriminations of Vaishnavism and Saivism turned more into intellectual arguments rather than mutually exclusive philosophies fighting each other. CONCLUSION So, in short, unless you belong to a small percentage distinct Vaishnava followers in Kerala like Gowda Saraswat Brahmins or you are initiated by a Guru to Vaishnavism, you do not have to think much about this confusing topic. Also if Krishnadaya or anyone else follow Vaishnavism, they are absolutely right to do so and tell you that they see Krishna as the only Supreme god head. Guruvayoor Temple As far I know Guruvayoor temple is not distinctly defined as a Vaishnava tradition temple anywhere. Guruvayoor was the temple of Samoothiris, and there is no such mention as Samoothiri's were being Vaishnavites or Shaivites. Also, Guruvayoor pooja routines were laid down by Adi Sankaracharya and he is considered as a re-incarnation of Siva. It is important to note that Sankaracharya was not a Saivite or Vaishnavite, but written bhajans like Bhaja Govindam and Shivnandalahari. Reasons for our uniqueness Geographically, Kerala is isolated from the rest of India and because of this fact, our culture is quite unique, and so is our Hinduism. Hence, I also do not agree when someone from outside Kerala tells me that we are not real Hindu's as we don't celebrate Deepavali or Holi! Regarding Gothra, well.. thats for another day! Please correct me of any errors, dear knowledgeable elders. Om Namo Narayanya: Sunil.guruvayur , KEERTHI KUMAR V MENON <keerthibai wrote:>> > Ohm Namo Bhagavathe Vasudevaya; Ohm Namo Narrayanaya> > Dear Krishnadaya and others,> > In kerala there is no difference between Vishnavates> or Saivates. Here all peoples worships in Siva and> vaishnava temples. Nobody is saying is saying we> worship only in vaishnava temple or in siva temple. > > Read Ramayana, you can see Rama worships siva in so> many places. I believe you must know about Ramaswaram> temple. > > The split between devotes of siva and vishnau is> created by ISKON now. The ISKON activates separates> devotees as Siva and Vaishnava.> > Why we have to argue ? We can call Gurauvayoorappan > > Ohm Namo Narrayanaya; Ohm Namo Bhagavathe vasudevaya> > Keerthi Kumar> > --- "K.V Gopalakrishna" gopalakrishna.kv wrote:> > > > > Dear Sri. Ganapathy Raman, Krishnadaya and others.> > Radhe Krishna.> > There seems to be a small wrong understanding about> the term"Vaishnava.". The term "Vaishnava" is> referred to also in many placesin Bhagavatam. It> means "the one who worships Vishnu". It is wrongto> assume that a socalled "Vaishnava" can only worship> Vishnu. VishnuHimself is said to be worshipping Lord> Siva in many places. So it isthe understanding of the> term "Vaishnava" makes all the difference.> > Kindly pardon me for the interference.> In humble devotion,> KVG.> > > > GANAPATHY RAMAN wrote: So according to Krishnadaya> only people who are Vaishnavites areexpected to visit > and worship Sri Guruvayurappan and when the mainDeity> plays prominent role sub deities don't hv much> importance.Thisseems to be a strange theory that only> Vaishnavites shuld visit Krishnatemples and Saivites> visit Siva temples and thereby distinquishing eventhe> very nature of God and splitting Him into two parts as> VaishnavaGod and Saiva God.Quite strange.There is no> necesiity for any argumentas this requires only> commonsense that all people who visit Krishnatemple at> Guruvayur are not Vaishnavites as Krishnadaya> mayimagine.They also worshiip Siva ,Sastha and other> deities ofSaivites.Why shuld God be baulkanised as> Vaishnava God and Saiva God?InSiva temples too we hv> vaishnava deities and all worship that and nodisputes.> > Krishnadaya must also understand that Narayaneeyam> might hv beenmade by Melpathur but the glory of the> same was spread allover Indiaand abroad by the late> Anantharama Deekshidar who was a doyen ofdiscourses> and when he was afflicted by illness he went to GVR> andworshipped Sri Krishna thru Narayaneeyam and in> course got his diseasecured and from then onwards> wherever he went for doing discourses hemade it a> point to discourse Narayaneeyam and by that only many> peoplecame to know even the existence of such a> hymn.Perhaps you may not beaware this fact.That is why> even his photo is adorned along withbhatthathiri in> GVR temple.He was not a vaishnava but an> ardentSaiva.So don't try to make your conclusion that> Sri > Guruvayurappan belongs to only people who are> Vaishanavites andall who visit the temple are> vaishnavas.That has stemmed from yourimagination.I am> not arguing with you as it is a waste I know asyou hv> a definite mind set up which can't accept other> things.This Imentioned even in my reply earlier.> > Just by writing a comment an ardent devotee of> Krishna won'tchange or get confused as you imagine and> if the devotee does the samethen he or she is not a> devotee of Sri Krishna.Arguments wll always bethere> and not necessarily be taken as a matter of conversion> from onesect to another sect.Just becoz the vaishnava> acharyas reject advaitafollowers of Sankara and others> can that argument be accepted and doyou think it has> any sanctity?This seems to be some conversion> theorynever believe advaita and only what vaishnava> acharyas said believethose things.Such things shuld> not hv been written as the same willonly confuse the> real bhakthas of Sri Krishna.who will get> theimpression of worshipping saivite Gods like Siva> and others are againstreligious spirit.You believe in> whatever things as I hv already said inmy earlier> reply that all depends on individuals perceptions> andconvictions.But ridiculing Sankara undoubtedly the> Greatest of alland praising only the vaishnava> acharyas is not the proper way ofpresenting the matter> and shows your immaturity only.You must hv the > broad vision to accept all things enunciated by all> the acharyasand not confining yourself in some shelf.> > Anyways there is no meaning to say to you who can't> hv the mindto accept the views of others also and> clinging to one particularthing and rejecting all the> other Great people who brought glory toIndia, is> simply futile.I hv never criticised Gita,Bhagavatham> and youimagine something as if I am trying to wean> away the devotees ofKrishna to some other sect.I am> not for any such move but definitelyyour writings show> you are on that path which is simply ridiculous> andpitiable.For your info I am not for Vaishnava sect> or Saiva sect as Ilove both sects > and worship the Gods of both sects and also a good> follower ofSri Guruvayurappan and I may hv my own> Ishta Devata and that ispersonal.> > Again I say I wrote the reply not to offend you> neither this oneor the previous one but only to make> you understand that you shuld hvmore broad views on > spiritual matters and not live like a frog in a> well.God Blessdear friend Krishnadaya. and don't get> agitated by this reply as I hvtold only the truth and> as an answer to your reply.Let us stop withthis as you> hv certain mind set which does not allow to make> yourthinking broader and you must accept the fact that> God is One whetherVaishnava God or Saiva God.> krishnadayawrote> > Krishna, Guruvayoorappa,> > It is not advisable to argue when someone questions> the > fundamental supreme authority of Sri Krishna as well> as His literary > incarnations and restricts the scope of discussion to> non-vaishnava > saints . As such, this write up is just to remove the> confusion in > the minds of Krishna-bhaktas who were disturbed by the> mentioned > distortion . > > When a Vaishnava goes to Guruvayoor temple , he/she> worships the > presiding Deity Guruvayoorappan as well as the> sub-deities therein > namely Siva, Ganesha , Bhagavathy and Ayyappan . As> such the > question of spiritual intolerance doesn't arise . > > Ishta-devatha is a term meaning "the God one prays> most." Sri > Krishna is the `Ishta-devatha of Vaishnavas for whom> focused Bhakti-> Yoga to Him is like life-air . > > Vaishnava authorites like Ramanuja , Madhava ,> Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, > Melpathur Naryana Bhattathiri ,and Prabhupada have> asked their > followers to remain steadfast in their Bhakri-yoga by> fully complying > with Bhagavan's instructions . In fact , these> Acharyas strongly > rejected the Maya-vadi philosophy of the Advaitists .> Accordingly, > the Vaishnavas are relying on specific scriptures like> Bhagavatham , > Gita and Narayaneeyam which have the stamp of approval> by Bhagavan > Krishna Himself . And Bhagavan provides His Devotees> with > opportunities and wisdom to understand the concepts of> the mentioned > scriptures . A designer has to comply with the> specified codes and > standards in order to produce an acceptable product .> Same way , a > Vaishnava complies with the eternal instructions of> Sri Krishna > without fail . There is no difference between Sri> Krishna , His His > attributes and His instructions . > > Bhagavad Gita is relevant for all ages . Even in this> Kali-yuga , > Gita guides it's followers in the right path. > > A humble servant of Guruvayoorappan . > > -------------------------> guruvayur ,GANAPATHY RAMAN> agraman62@ > wrote:> >> > This is only my thoughts and in no way be treated as> a rebuttal of > Krishnadayas postings as I hv already made known> Krishnadaya is a > devotee of Krishna and could not tolerate anything is> said other than > Krishna.But the fact is that Krishna is only one of> the eversomany > Gods in our Hindu mythology.Though His avatar was> different from > others and He preached Gita it becomes easier to quote> from what He > said.My point is then what abt other Gods and their> followers who > also get the same benefits which Krishna> promised.Krishna told only > arjuna in a battlefield His teachings.Following the> same in all > circumstances won't lead us > > in the present age as many of them are not> practicable.Hetaught > arjuna only to surrender to Him and fight the war> instead of running > out of the battle field and do the duty of a> Kshatriya.So just > banking only on Gita alone for all the ills of the> society won't help > much,I think.The teachings happened abt 4 or 5000> years ago in a > different yuga and applying all the tenets in the> present age will > lead only to confusion.This does not mean I challenge> Krsihnadaya but > her wordings used seem to be not correct,I feel.> > > > Krishnadaya uses that jnanis is also devotees and> there arise > duality and such things.She harps on devotion and> diluting the same > amounts to absurdity.May be she is correct.But how> devotion comes?Is > it by seeing a Deity or by reading some texts or Gita?> She > elaborately quoted from Bhagavatam.Just becoz this> Group is dedicated > Sri Guruvayoorappan is it a must that one shuld quote> only > > from Gita,Bhagavatam and Narayaneeyam.Is there> anycompulsion.Or > the scriptures mean only these three.Then what abt> Nayanmars who are > 64 in number who worshipped Siva and made lot of hymns> in praise of > Him.Are they not followers or devotees?Sankara ,an> acknowledged > advaitin wrote Saundarya > > Lahiri,a beautiful celestial song on Devi shuld be> ignored?He was > no doubt a> > Realised soul and he never wrote that hymn for> himself as there > was no necessity for him as when one merged in the God> there is no > dualism but all can't become like him and hence he> coined so many > hymns on Devi ,Ananda Lahiri on Siva,Bhaja Govindam on> > Krishna,Subrahmanya bhujangam on Subrahmanya and there> was no > necesiity for him to do all those things when he knew> he was only > writing the same on himself being one with God but for> the > > other mortals like Krishnadaya and me to develop the> bhakthy > marga so that people like us can recite the same and> try to evolve > ourselves in the ladder of bhakthy.> > So too Ramakrishna Paramahansa worshipped Kali and> got her vision > and thru Her Grace got all the knowledge though he did> not study much > abt the scriptures and other things but becoz of the> Grace he could > quote so many teachings.The same thing is with sage> Ramana who took a > different path by > > having his own theory to find out whatwas he and> thru 'atma > vichara' he dived within himself and found that he was> also a speck > of the Creator.All Realised souls or jnanis though> initially they hv > to be bhakthas of some deitiy and thru severe> austerities and > spiritual discipline were able to merge in the Cosmic> Power and there > was no necessity for them to become a devotee again as> they hv > crossed that stage and when they had realised that all> are ONE then > who shuld be a devotee for whom?As we were having the> same problem > earlier I mentioned that the river is a river by name> only so long > the same reaches the ocean and when the same merges> with the ocean > then the identity of the river is lost and do you want> to say that > the ocean is a devotee of the river or vice versa when> the river has > already become one with the ocean?> > As I don't hv much knowledge abt sastras I can't> comment on > that.But how many sastras you know and do you know the> meaning of > what they import to the understanding of common people> like me.We > always hv readymade answer that such and such thing is> said in > sastras,Krishna has said such things in Gita,> > Bhagavatham says such and such things and so we> shuld follow.Then > are we not becoming something like a robot without> really > understanding and try to improve our own knowledge?For> anything and > everything we depend on some texts mean we just> surrender our God > given intelligence and wisdom to those quotes.Don' you> think so?Why > man is given intelligence and wisdom?To use it > > in a way that he or she shuld be able to study and> try to > understand both the aspects positive and negative and> the > applicability of the same in the times we live in and> not moving back > to several thousand years .We shuld try to study those> things and > also use our own versions and realise the reality> according to > change of times.What Gita says or Bhagavatham says> need not > necessarily be followed literally but one must use> one's senses and > try to intrepret > > according to needs.In the whole of the world how> many people are > real Krishna devotees?doyou think that you can make> the whole world > one of Krishna Conscious stage? I hv to ask you this> questions not > out of showing that I am greater than you in knowledge> or to show > some sort of ego complex which Idon't > > possess but your wordings are such which I can't> digest.Hence > this staright > > questions not to wound you but harping on one> subject only we > can't develop bhakthy but making ourselves adjusting> to the thoughts > of others only thru > > pursuasion one must try to make others realise the> facts that > contain in our > > statements.If you would hv covered all the aspects> of all deities > and all types of > > devotees of other deities then I would hv certainly> appreciated > you.But instead of that you chose the path of jnanis> and making that > others think devotion as absurdity are not in any way> ethical and it > shows some type of assertation that people who worship> other deities > and who got knowlede by worshipping their own deities> other than > Krishna are not devotees or bhakthas and attacking> jnanis are not the > proper way.Anyway you or I are not jnanis and then how> can we make > comment on them and no janni says thatyou hv to accept> his versions > only including Krishna who also distinguishes bhakthas> into four > categories.> > > > Your following of Krishna and your concern for Him> is laudable > but the way you hv presented is not palatable at least> to me.There > are so many saints who worship eversomany deities for> years and when > their karmic effects are over they > > get themselves merged in the Oneness and there is no> rebirth for > them and they need not come back again to hv more> experiences as even > Sri Krishna has said in Gita.Such souls are rarely> found and they > never exhibit themselves.So there is no more devotion> is required for > them as they hv become one with the Creator.> > Till we reach that time some following or devotion> of somebody is > a must and I used to say when one chooses one deity> one shuld cling > on to that.Then how bhakthy comes?Not from birth but> when the child > grows and the parents take the child to temples and> say good things > and the same shuld get imbibed in the mind of the> child and then it > will grow automatically over the years.Now a days how> many children > are taught bhakthy by their parents?Teaching Gita and> other things > can takeplace when the child grows up sufficiently> advanced and you > can't expect a child of even 10 to grasp what Krishna> said in > Gita.All those things> > can come only at a later part of time as Dr.Saroja> Ramanujam has > pointed in> > another mail.Till then the child will be more> interested in his > or her studies andto> > come out successfully in life and at that time if> you go on > teaching Gita and other things they will even lose> what little > interest they hv got.Even during Krishnas' time or> subsequent times > how many people knew Gita nobody knows.Actually I came> to get some > interest in Gita only after hearing a 'Gita Yagna'> which the late > Swami Chinmayanada used to conduct and I was attracted> by his > language,erudition,the wayhe used to pronounce the> subject in avery > lucid manner.So expecting too much and quoting Gita> and Bhagavatam > may be ok for a group but in real life I wonder how> far the same will > attract persons.Of course in all discourses people may> throng as > their is no dearth for people in thiscountry > > anywhere but afterwards what happen to them and> whether they > follow the teachings or just ignore and appreciate> only the > scholorlypresentation of the > > lecturer we don't know.> > Dear Krishna,if any of my sentences hv the effect of> wounding > your feelings kindly bear with me as it is not my> intention to offend > you in any manner.You wrote something and just I> countered that is > all.Since this will make other members also to take> part in a new > twist to the points I hv put some questions which> sometimes you may > find the same difficult to answer.So with all the> articles,as > putting questions is easy but to give a convincing> reply is difficult.> > Again I beg your excuses if you feel in anyway> offended by my > writings as I hv always treated you as my good> friend.Also I say I > am not against Bhagavatam,> > Gita and other scriptures but much dependence on the> sayings > won't help in the present day world as what Krishna> preached was > under different circumstances though they may be> applicable in some > cases and not in all respects.> > > > Hare Krishna,> > > > agraman.> > > > > > > > > > Here's a new way to find what you're looking for -> Answers> >> > > > > > > > > Here's a new way to find what you're looking for -> Answers > > > > > > > > > > > Get on board. You're invited to try the new Mail Beta. Everyone is raving about the all-new Mail Beta. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.