Lord Shiva

[Guest guest]

Haribol,

 

I humbly request that someone please explain the following verse (using guru and sastra as evidence). It shows Lord Brahma directly addressing Lord Shiva as Supreme Brahman. I thought Krishna was Supreme Brahman. It is very confusing.

 

SB 4.6.42: Lord Brahma said: My dear Lord Shiva, I know that you are the controller of the entire material manifestation, the combination father and mother of the cosmic manifestation, and the Supreme Brahman beyond the cosmic manifestation as well. I know you in that way.

 

PURPORT

 

Although Lord Brahma had received very respectful obeisances from Lord Shiva, he knew that Lord Shiva was in a more exalted position than himself. Lord Shiva's position is described in Brahma-samhita: there is no difference between Lord Vishnu and Lord Shiva in their original positions, but still Lord Shiva is different from Lord Vishnu. The example is given that the milk in yogurt is not different from the original milk from which it was made.

 

Thank you,

 

Your Servant.

[sumedh]

Hare Krishna and dandavat pranam

 

The purport already explains it. When Lord Shiva is seen as an expansion of Lord Vishnu then they are considered same (just like Guru) and in the other aspect Lord Shiva is a separated portion of Krishna but in any case he is not vishnu-tattva.

 

Brahma-Samhita 5.45

 

Just as milk is transformed into curd by the action of acids, but yet the effect curd is neither same as, nor different from, its cause, viz., milk, so I adore the primeval Lord Govinda of whom the state of Sambhu is a transformation for the performance of the work of destruction.

 

PURPORT

 

(The real nature of Sambhu, the presiding deity of Mahesa-dhama, is described.) Sambhu is not a second Godhead other than Krishna. Those, who entertain such discriminating sentiment, commit a great offense against the Supreme Lord. The supremacy of Sambhu is subservient to that of Govinda; hence they are not really different from each other. The nondistinction is established by the fact that just as milk treated with acid turns into curd so Godhead becomes a subservient when He Himself attains a distinct personality by the addition of a particular element of adulteration. This personality has no independent initiative. The said adulterating principle is constituted of a combination of the stupefying quality of the deluding energy, the quality of nonplenitude of the marginal potency and a slight degree of the ecstatic-cum-cognitive principle of the plenary spiritual potency. This specifically adulterated reflection of the principle of the subjective portion of the Divinity is Sadasiva, in the form of the effulgent masculine-symbol-god Sambhu from whom Rudradeva is manifested. In the work of mundane creation as the material cause, in the work of preservation by the destruction of sundry asuras and in the work of destruction to conduct the whole operation, Govinda manifests Himself as guna-avatara in the form of Sambhu who is the separated portion of Govinda imbued with the principle of His subjective plenary portion. The personality of the destructive principle in the form of time has been identified with that of Sambhu by scriptural evidences that have been adduced in the commentary. The purport of the Bhagavata slokas, viz., vaishnavanam yatha sambhuh, etc., is that Sambhu, in pursuance of the will of Govinda, works in union with his consort Durgadevi by his own time energy. He teaches pious duties (dharma) as stepping-stones to the attainment of spiritual service in the various tantra-sastras, etc., suitable for jivas in different grades of the conditional existence. In obedience to the will of Govinda, Sambhu maintains and fosters the religion of pure devotion by preaching the cult of illusionism (Mayavada) and the speculative agama-sastras. The fifty attributes of individual souls are manifest in a far vaster measure in Sambhu and five additional attributes not attainable by jivas are also partly found in him. So Sambhu cannot be called a jiva. He is the lord of jiva but yet partakes of the nature of a separated portion of Govinda.

 

 

 

Chaitanya-Charitamrta Madhya 20.308

 

Rudra, Lord Siva, has various forms, which are transformations brought about by association with maya. Although Rudra is not on a level with the jiva-tattvas, he still cannot be considered a personal expansion of Lord Krsna.

 

PURPORT

 

Rudra is simultaneously one with and different from the visnu-tattva. Due to his association with maya, he is different from the visnu-tattva, but at the same time he is an expansion of Krsna's personal form. This situation is called bhedabheda-tattva or acintya-bhedabheda-tattva, simultaneously one and different.

 

 

 

Also to be considered is the fact that Lord Shiva is an expansion from Lord Mahavishnu or Lord Sadasiva in vaikuntha. There is difference between Lord Sadasiva in vaikuntha who is vishnu-tattva, and Lord Shiva in Mahesh-Dhama who is also called Sadasiva. In any case, in that consideration he is considered non-different from vishnu but is not vishnu-tattva or God as given above.

 

 

Rudra, who is an expansion of Sadasiva and who appears in unlimited universes, is also a gunavatara [qualitative incarnation] and is the ornament of all the demigods in the endless universes.

 

PURPORT

 

There are eleven expansions of Rudra, or Lord Siva. They are as follows: Ajaikapat, Ahibradhna, Virupaksa, Raivata, Hara, Bahurupa, Devasrestha Tryambaka, Savitra, Jayanta, Pinaki and Aparajita. Besides these expansions there are eight forms of Rudra called earth, water, fire, air, sky, the sun, the moon and soma-yaji. Generally all these Rudras have five faces, three eyes and ten arms. Sometimes it is found that Rudra is compared to Brahma and considered a living entity. But when Rudra is explained to be a partial expansion of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, he is compared to Sesa. Lord Siva is therefore simultaneously an expansion of Lord Visnu and, in his capacity for annihilating the creation, one of the living entities. As an expansion of Lord Visnu he is called Hara, and he is transcendental to the material qualities, but when he is in touch with tamo-guna he appears contaminated by the material modes of nature. This is explained in Srimad-Bhagavatam and the Brahma-samhita. In Srimad-Bhagavatam, Tenth Canto, it is stated that Lord Rudra is always associated with the material nature when she is in the neutral, unmanifested stage, but when the modes of material nature are agitated he associates with material nature from a distance. In the Brahma-samhita the relationship between Visnu and Lord Siva is compared to that between milk and yogurt. Milk is converted into yogurt by certain additives, but although milk and yogurt have the same ingredients, they have different functions. Similarly, Lord Siva is an expansion of Lord Visnu, yet because of his taking part in the annihilation of the cosmic manifestation, he is considered to be changed, like milk converted into yogurt. In the Puranas it is found that Siva appears sometimes from the heads of Brahma and sometimes from the head of Visnu. The annihilator, Rudra, is born from Sankarsana and the ultimate fire to burn the whole creation. In the Vayu Purana there is a description of Sadasiva in one of the Vaikuntha planets. That Sadasiva is a direct expansion of Lord Krsna's form for pastimes. It is said that Sadasiva (Lord Sambhu) is an expansion from the Sadasiva in the Vaikuntha planets (Lord Visnu) and that his consort, Mahamaya, is an expansion of Rama-devi, or Laksmi. Mahamaya is the origin or birthplace of material nature.

 

 

 

To summarize, all the apparent contradictions in scriptures are only due to our partial understanding of acintya-bheda-abheda; the siddhanta is clear i.e. Lord Shiva is not vishnu-tattva.

[Guest guest]

Haribol,

 

Thanks for your reply. The problem is that Brahma addresses Lord Shiva as Supreme Brahman. We would never address our guru (e.g. Srila Prabhupada) as Supreme Brahman, so why does Brahma address Shiva as supreme Brahman?

 

Also:

 

"In the Vayu Purana there is a description of Sadasiva in one of the Vaikuntha planets. That Sadasiva is a direct expansion of Lord Krsna's form for pastimes. It is said that Sadasiva (Lord Sambhu) is an expansion from the Sadasiva in the Vaikuntha planets (Lord Visnu) and that his consort, Mahamaya, is an expansion of Rama-devi, or Laksmi."

 

Is it acceptable to worship the Sadashiva in the Vaikuntha planet that is a direct expansion of Lord Krsna? Just like Balarama or Narayana or Sankarsana or Damodara etc?

 

I look forward to hearing your reply.

 

Hare Krishna,

Your Servant

 

 

[Guest guest]

hari bol...

 

pls give me a clear explanation of the following verse in lingaashtakam. this seems to be telling that lord Shiva can even save a preson from birth and death?

 

1.

 

Brahma Muraari Suraarchita Lingam

Nirmala Bhashita Shobhita Lingam

Janmaja Dukha Vinaashaka Lingam

Tat Pranamaami Sadaa Shiva Lingam

 

Meaning: I bow before that Sada Shiva Linga, which is adored by Brahma, Vishnu and other Gods, which is praised by pure and holy speeches and which destroys the cycle of births and deaths.

 

i ud be greatly indebted...

 

ur servant

 

[imported_yasodanandana]

the verse is clear, it is a description of something happened very often

 

our vaishnava interpretation is that shiva saves from samsara because he's a highest devotee of sri krsna, and that krsna sometimes worships sri shiva to show us the right behaviour

[sumedh]

Hare Krishna and dandavat pranam

 

Sorry for the late reply; somehow i missed this post.

 

The problem is that Brahma addresses Lord Shiva as Supreme Brahman. We would never address our guru (e.g. Srila Prabhupada) as Supreme Brahman, so why does Brahma address Shiva as supreme Brahman?

 

 

 

That consideration would only be for neophytes who do not know the tattva. Since Lord Brahma, the Guru of our sampradaya, knows the tattva completely this is not a consideration -- plus this, in a sense, emphasizes the "secretive" nature of scriptures that they cannot be understood by mere scholarship. To explain this more, consider the Guru who also is addressed as:

 

Gurur Brahma Gurur Vishnu

Gurur Devo Maheshwaraha

Guru Sakshaat Parabrahman

Tasmai Shri Guruve Namaha

 

 

 

because he is the direct representative of svayam-prakasha (i.e. Lord Baladeva) of Krishna. People (read advaitins) not knowing the tattva make incorrect interpretations of this and all similiar verses. Lord Shiva is the topmost Guru, guna-avataar, etc. and so Lord Brahma addresses him in that manner.

 

Disciple: "In some of our temples, such as Vrndavana, the murti [statue] of Your Divine Grace has been installed, and they [your disciples] are offering prasadam [foodstuffs]... So is it the same [Lord Krishna accepts offerings through His statue or picture] that the prasadam is accepted by the guru?"

Srila Prabhupada: "Yes. Saksad-dharitvena samasta-sastrair, ‘The guru is non-different than Krishna.’ That is accepted by all the sastras… Kintu prabhor yah priya eva tasya, ‘But the guru’s position is the most confidential servant.’ So the guru is the servant God, and Krishna is the master God. Both of them are God-- servant God and master God." (Conversation, October 27, 1975, Nairobi)

 

 

 

I hope this makes it clear.

 

 

Is it acceptable to worship the Sadashiva in the Vaikuntha planet that is a direct expansion of Lord Krsna? Just like Balarama or Narayana or Sankarsana or Damodara etc?

 

 

 

Yes, but that Lord Sadashiva is a personal expansion of Lord Mahavishnu and thus directly Lord Vishnu. He resides in Vaikuntha and not in Mahesh-Dhama, He does not associate with maya-sakti (goddess Durga), etc., sadashiva is one of the names of Lord Krishna -- Advaitacharya prabhu is considered a combined incarnation of Lord Mahavishnu and Lord Sadashiva. Normally people call Lord Shiva in Mahesh-Dhama as Lord Sadashiva who associates with mahamaya. Simply too many people have confused the two and use such puranic evidence to claim Lord Shiva as God. Plus i do not know of any of the authorized Deity forms of Lord Sadashiva though Srila Prabhupada says in the introduction to Srimad-Bhagavatam 10 chapter 34:

 

One day Nanda Maharaja and the other cowherd men placed their family members on their bullock carts and went to the Ambikavana forest to worship Lord Siva. After bathing in the Sarasvati River and worshiping Lord Sadasiva, a form of Lord Vishnu, they decided to spend the night in the forest.

 

 

 

In my opinion it will be perfectly good to worship such a Deity form of Lord Sadashiva.

[Guest guest]

prabhu, but if it is our intrpretation ,a saivaite intrprtation would establish Shiva's supremacy and hence wouldnt the imbroglio continue?

 

if my understanding of parampara system the 4 sampradayas are established by a sloka in padma puaran..and we accept intrepretation based on that particular sloka...which states the vaisnava philosophy can be explained only by sri,brama,rudra and sanat kuamras....thats abt vaisnavism.

 

so do saivaites support their argument based on their disciplic succession of saivaite gurus?

 

so where do we go?

 

and another q..: in haevnt read all the puranas and it is alsoa fact that only some% of the vedic texts are avilable.so considering this why not there could be some kore descriptions in the other "lost " texts which can be considereda sth like climax pages of a novel and contain the ultimate conclusion?

 

so if someone says since u havent read all the vedic texts , how can u say that other vedic texts dont state some one else to be the supreme god? pls do reply to my queries though they may seem very trivial.

 

hare krishna!

 

[sumedh]

Hare Krishna

please accept my dandavat pranam

 

 

prabhu, but if it is our intrpretation ,a saivaite intrprtation would establish Shiva's supremacy and hence wouldnt the imbroglio continue?

 

 

 

That would continue regardless, so why worry. The vaishnava acharyas have engaged in thorough philosophical debates all over India, and all prominent acharyas were digvijayi (all-conquering) who defeated all the other philosophies. In this particular case the answer is easy: the lingastakam is composed by Sripad Shankaracharya and is not acceptable as a pramana.

 

In particular, the question of liberation is addressed by Srila Prabhupada in Bhagavad-Gita 7.14

 

 

daivi hy esa guna-mayi

mama maya duratyaya

mam eva ye prapadyante

mayam etam taranti te

 

TRANSLATION

This divine energy of Mine, consisting of the three modes of material nature, is difficult to overcome. But those who have surrendered unto Me can easily cross beyond it.

 

PURPORT

The Supreme Personality of Godhead has innumerable energies, and all these energies are divine. Although the living entities are part of His energies and are therefore divine, due to contact with material energy, their original superior power is covered. Being thus covered by material energy, one cannot possibly overcome its influence. As previously stated, both the material and spiritual natures, being emanations from the Supreme Personality of Godhead, are eternal. The living entities belong to the eternal superior nature of the Lord, but due to contamination by the inferior nature, matter, their illusion is also eternal. The conditioned soul is therefore called nitya-baddha, or eternally conditioned. No one can trace out the history of his becoming conditioned at a certain date in material history. Consequently, his release from the clutches of material nature is very difficult, even though that material nature is an inferior energy, because material energy is ultimately conducted by the supreme will, which the living entity cannot overcome. Inferior material nature is defined herein as divine nature due to its divine connection and movement by the divine will. Being conducted by divine will, material nature, although inferior, acts so wonderfully in the construction and destruction of the cosmic manifestation. The Vedas confirm this as follows: mayam tu prakrtim vidyan mayinam tu mahesvaram. "Although maya [illusion] is false or temporary, the background of maya is the supreme magician, the Personality of Godhead, who is Mahesvara, the supreme controller."

Another meaning of guna is rope; it is to be understood that the conditioned soul is tightly tied by the ropes of illusion. A man bound by the hands and feet cannot free himself--he must be helped by a person who is unbound. Because the bound cannot help the bound, the rescuer must be liberated. Therefore, only Lord Krsna, or His bona fide representative the spiritual master, can release the conditioned soul. Without such superior help, one cannot be freed from the bondage of material nature. Devotional service, or Krsna consciousness, can help one gain such release. Krsna, being the Lord of illusory energy, can order this insurmountable energy to release the conditioned soul. He orders this release out of His causeless mercy on the surrendered soul and out of His paternal affection for the living entity who is originally a beloved son of the Lord. Therefore surrender unto the lotus feet of the Lord is the only means to get free from the clutches of the stringent material nature.

The words mam eva are also significant. Mam means unto Krsna (Visnu) only, and not Brahma or Siva. Although Brahma and Siva are greatly elevated and are almost on the level of Visnu, it is not possible for such incarnations of rajo-guna (passion) and tamo-guna (ignorance) to release the conditioned soul from the clutches of maya. In other words, both Brahma and Siva are also under the influence of maya. Only Visnu is the master of maya; therefore He can alone give release to the conditioned soul. The Vedas confirm this in the phrase tam eva viditva or "Freedom is possible only by understanding Krsna." Even Lord Siva affirms that liberation can be achieved only by the mercy of Visnu. Lord Siva says:

 

mukti-pradata sarvesam visnur eva na samsayah.

 

"There is no doubt that Visnu is the deliverer of liberation for everyone."

 

 

 

The authority of Bhagavad-Gita is unquestionable as regards final philosophical conclusions. So all the other seemingly contradictory statements should be understood (or "adjusted") in accordance with the siddhanta as presented in Bhagavad-Gita and Srimad-Bhagavatam.

 

As regards Shaivism, there are many points here:

-- one as you mentioned, the verse from Padma-Purana which states that those not connected to the four vaishnava sampradayas will do only fruitless labour

-- the famous harer nama, harer nama kevalam verse

-- Lord Shiva himself says to Goddess Parvati that he establishes false paths like shaivism in kali-yuga

-- All the accepted acharyas, including Veda Vyasa whose authority is unchallengable were vaishnava (barring, of course, Sripad Shankaracharya)

-- The division of puranas into satvic, rajasic, tamasic and that only the satvic puranas can be considered an authority

-- The supremacy of Srimad-Bhagavatam over and above all others; this is explained here for example: http://www.gosai.com/dvaita/madhvacarya/srimad-bhagavatam.html

-- Of course the authority of Lord Krishna and Lord Chaitanya and all others

-- the gaudiya philosophy has been completely established by Srila Jiva Gosvami, the acharya of philosophy of our line, exhaustively using Vedic texts in Krsna-Sandarbha (e.g. he gives about fifty statements from vedic texts for establishing Lord Krishna as the Original Personality of Godhead); not to forget the govinda bhasya by Srila Baladeva Vidyabhushana on the Vedanta Sutra which is unquestionably accepted by all vedic schools as the ultimate philosophical conclusion

 

Other devotees can add many more points.

[sumedh]

Hare Krishna and dandavats

 

 

and another q..: in haevnt read all the puranas and it is alsoa fact that only some% of the vedic texts are avilable.so considering this why not there could be some kore descriptions in the other "lost " texts which can be considereda sth like climax pages of a novel and contain the ultimate conclusion?

 

 

 

You are right about this one. But by the mercy of the Lord the two irrefutable and highest pranamas are completely preserved. The GitaUpanishad which is considered the cream of all the upanishads, (upanishads are the philosophical sections of the Vedas) including those which may no longer available, by all authorities (including Sripad Shankaracharya) and the Srimad-Bhagavatam which is the ripened fruit of all vedic literature are available in entirety; these form the principle sastras of our sampradaya.

[imported_yasodanandana]

"prabhu, but if it is our intrpretation ,a saivaite intrprtation would establish Shiva's supremacy and hence wouldnt the imbroglio continue?"

 

the discussion between vishnu's followers and shiva's followers about supremacy is eternal.

 

I do not see spiritual world so i don't know who is the supreme chief.

 

The only thing to do, for me, is to follow my spiritual master and srila prabhupada who represent the best available to get liberation and realization.... they say that vishnu is supreme and shiva is subordinated.

 

if there's a mistake lord shiva and lord vishnu are very dear each other.. so i think that if i'll go to vaikunta i'll be saved in both cases

[Guest guest]

Sumedh,

 

Please name and quote where Lord Shiva says to Parvati that Shivaism is a false path. I think it is part of vaishnava promotional campaign. It is an Aparadha to claim Lord Shiva as a mere demi-God inthe first place. Shivaism is as false as Vaishnvaism! If this is all the vaishnavas do is to put down Shivaism and other lineages and show arrogancy.

 

You don't accept the Lingashtakam of Sripada Sankaracharya. He was certainely much greater than Prabhupada. Sankaracharya defeated maya and nature and even made a bull pronounce gayatri mantra that was beyond its true nature. He was the zenith of Sadhna. You are the zenith of advertisement and propaganda! That's what most acharyas are busy doing! Instead of paying attention of to their sadhanas they are out there arguing on books!

Yes Prabhupada marketed his organization all over world. So did Pepsi and Coke! At least they don't go about advertising Lord Siva as a Demi-God. And all you do is collect money! We can sit home and chant mantras without you!

You don't even know the proper mantra-yoga.

Every time I visit the ISKCON temple in Vrindavan, some part of it is made to show as under construction so that you can ask for more donations.

Why don't you go and clean up Vraj dham with this money instead?? That is Hare Krishna!

[Guest guest]

Bhaja Govindam bhaja Govindam bhaja Govindam mudha mate

 

Shankaracharya was a great bhakta and should be respected

[Guest guest]

Dear Krishna Das Prabhu,

 

Your message is clear! All we have to do is chant the holy name.

I apologize to all for my annoying and aggressive answer to sumedh's message. It certainely is not the way a vaishnava or Shaiv sadhak should behave. I let my anger overflow. But it is a pity that some people give a hundred reasons to belittle Lord Shiva.

May Krishna give the moodh mates more mati!

Hare Krishna!

[Guest guest]

Can't we just keep all the Shiva debates in one topic? There are now roughly 6 topics about whether or not Shiva is Supreme Lord. No need for that!

[Guest guest]

Why, do Siva threads flip you??

[Guest guest]

we'll take care of what is needed!

[Guest guest]

If we can say Lord Nrsimhadeva is Narayana and therefore the origin of Mahavishnu and therefore the entire material creation, then we can say Sadashiva is Narayana and therefore the origin of Mahavishnu as well. But one thing I am sure of is Lord Sadashiva is the supreme personality of Godhead.

 

I believe it's Sanat Kumara or atleast one of the four kumaras in the Skanda Purana saying if you chant the names of Hari in Kaliyuga you'll be save from Kali but if you chant the names of Shiva you'll be save from Kali as well.