But even though Lord Siva associates with maya..

[Pankaja_Dasa]

 

Hare Krishna,

 

I always wondered how about this, so am posting. [The answer]

 

 

TRANSLATION

My dear Lord Sambhu, who within this material world but you can surpass My illusory energy? People are generally attached to sense enjoyment and conquered by its influence. Indeed, the influence of material nature is very difficult for them to surmount.

 

PURPORT

Of the three chief demigods -- Brahma, Vishnu and Mahesvara -- all but Vishnu are under the influence of maya. In Caitanya-caritamrita, they are described as mayi, which means "under maya's influence." But even though Lord Siva associates with maya, he is not influenced . The living entities are affected by maya, but although Lord Siva apparently associates with maya, he is not affected. In other words, all living entities within this material world except for Lord Siva are swayed by maya. Lord Siva is therefore neither vishnu-tattva nor jiva-tattva. He is between the two.

http://srimadbhagavatam.com/8/12/39/en1

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

hari bol !

 

I belive this deep down in my heart...who really knows the diff between hari & shiva...only they know it

[Guest guest]

Hare Krishna!

 

I think the relationship between Lord Krishna and Siva is very confidential and is of a different nature.

 

and only Krishna and Siva can understand it...i guess!

 

Haribol!

 

anand

[Guest guest]

You are absolutely right!

This is something that only Lord Shiva and Vishnu can know.

If someone else wants to speculate on it, then he is under the spell of maya, big time!!

[Yogkriya]

Hare Krishna !!

 

If you carefully look at the purport, you will will see the extent of changes that the Gaudiya Sampradaya influence has made in the original scriptures.

Nowwhere does the original metioned shloka mentions the words demi-gods to start with and nowhere does that metion Lord shiva as a demiGod to start with!!

What to talk about maya then!!!

And nowhere does it says that Lord Shiva is not Vishnu tatva or is not jiva tatva. This purport is biased and not complete!! Nowhere except this purport do we see in the original scriptures mentioning Lord Shiva as "between the two tatvas"!! Shiva is Shiva!! He is complete!! Not "demi!" or "semi" or "half"!

He is the Shiv tatva which is beyond the power of an human being to understand, grasp or explain!! Only Hari can do that. So why even bother speculating on it??

 

Hari Bol!!

[Pankaja_Dasa]

 

 

 

You need to see why His Divine Grace A.C Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada is using the word Demi-god.

 

 

Please read the following-

When there is no Jiva-tattva qualified enough to accept the post of Shankara, at that time Vishnu takes role of Shankara [here Maharaja says Vishnu means Sada-shiva].

 

Sada-shiva Himself comes here who is Vishnu-tattva and He plays the part of Shankara. Otherwise Jiva-tattva who is qualified enough he takes the part of Shankara. So it is not at all advisable to equate Shankara and Lord, Shankara is always dedicated devotee of Lord Shiva. Gaura-premanande Hari-Haribol.

-From a Video Lecture by Narayana Maharaja, Translated from Hindi, Typed out by me for this purpose.

 

 

 

Sankara-tattva is extremely complex. Brahma-tattva is not so complicated; he is always jiva-tattva. And sometimes, when there is no qualified jiva, Lord Visnu himself comes as Brahma. But Sankara is not like this. He is not jiva-tattva. Where does he live? Beyond Brahmaloka. After passing through the eight kinds of material coverings, after crossing the Viraja, Muktidhama, Mahakalapuram, and then Brahmaloka, there is the planet of Sankara. There he is known as Sadasiva, and he is Visnu-tattva.

 

For any reason, if something sour is put into milk, it becomes yogurt. Yogurt is nothing but milk. It has all the potencies that are in milk, like ghee and so forth, but it is not milk. Milk can become yogurt, but yogurt cannot become milk. Sankara is like that. He is not an ordinary jiva. Sometimes, but very rarely, there may be a reason that Sadasiva cannot come to this world – if he is engaged in his destruction of the universe, or anything like that. In that case a qualified jiva can work as Siva; temporarily, but not permanently. So you should always try to honor Lord Sankara.

-Bhaktivedanta Narayana Maharaja in a Lecture about Siva-tattva

 

 

So Santana Sada-shiva is in Sada-shiva-loka [eternal abode] who is Vishnu-tattva, and He Himself becomes Shambu [neither Jiva nor Vishnu-tattva- Demi-God] So Prabhupada is reffering to this Shambu. Now in the offences to the Holy Names it says-

 

3. To consider the names of demi-gods such as Brahma or Shiva to be one with or different from the Holy Names of Lord Vishnu.

 

The above is reffering to Shambu [neither Jiva nor Vishnu-tattva or the Jiva who can take the form of Shiva for temp purposes].

 

Sada-shiva is expansion of Lord Baladeva [sri Balarama].

So you can sence Sada-shiva nature is to be a Vaishnava, and Supreme God. Although looking at the Tattva, He is always dependent on Vishnu.

[Yogkriya]

Dear prabhu,

Hari bol!

Please accept my humble obeisance!!

All glories to Sril Prabhupada!!

 

"Sada-shiva is expansion of Lord Baladeva [sri Balarama].

So you can sence Sada-shiva nature is to be a Vaishnava, and Supreme God. Although looking at the Tattva, He is always dependent on Vishnu. "

 

No, I do not agree with this explaination !

Lord Sada-Shiva is not an "expansion" of anyone and is not "dependent". To think like that is an offense in itself. Your view is based on Gaudiya scriptures, which are not a Shiava lineage and hence are not an authority on the position on Lord Shiva or Sada-Shiva!! Vishnu is the center and hence everyone else become as "dependent" in this termnology.

Did you ever ask a Shaiva who shiva is dependent on?!!

 

Whatever Vedic scriptures are present (without the commentary or the ones written by saints of Gudiya thought of lineage or not the ones written by his divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Srila Prabhupada's lineage of ) do believe everyone else as "dependent". If we talk to Shiva bhaktas, they do not believe that Lord Sada-Shiva has to be "dependent" on some one. Of course the Vishu tattva as well as Shiva tattvas work in unison. Maybe this could be a reason for you to contemplate that one is dependent on the other. But then the Vishnu tatva is as dependent on the Shiva tattva too. But the Gaudiya lineage, as is a Vaishnava lineage loves to maintain only one side of the truth.

But the truth is that, we are so small, even to talk or speculate about this.

Hari Bol!!

[Pankaja_Dasa]

"Sada-shiva is expansion of Lord Baladeva [sri Balarama].

So you can sence Sada-shiva nature is to be a Vaishnava, and Supreme God. Although looking at the Tattva, He is always dependent on Vishnu. "

 

No, I do not agree with this explaination !

Lord Sada-Shiva is not an "expansion" of anyone and is not "dependent". To think like that is an offense in itself. Your view is based on Gaudiya scriptures, which are not a Shiava lineage and hence are not an authority on the position on Lord Shiva or Sada-Shiva!! Vishnu is the center and hence everyone else become as "dependent" in this termnology.

Did you ever ask a Shaiva who shiva is dependent on?!!

 

 

 

Krishna is the source of all Incarnations as it says in the Bhagavatam. Whether you accept it or not is nothing to do with me. Balarama is an expansion of Krishna. And Sada-shiva is expanded from Baladeva. That is how it is. Krishna being the Supreme and all others His servants. Even Balarama is serving Krishna, what to say of anybody else. Sada-shiva loka is singing Vishnu Kirtan in Sada-shiva, [what do you think happens there!]. This also answers you question as regards to dependence. Hare Krishna

 

Finally you said yourself you have no idea about this, you are being totally offensive by saying Gaudiya Vaishnavas concoct some meanings, please give up this ego. As you can see yourself this is not something which is understandable by a few posts from me. It takes the grace of a devotee. So I would not Say Gaudiaya Vaishnava are wrong, just because you read something once doesn't mean you have actually understood it. This offensive mentality that a Pure Devotee is wrong, will never make you understand anything at all. It is actually your Ego saying 'I WANT TO UNDERSTAND IT! NOW!'. /images/graemlins/grin.gif We got to be always humble. /images/graemlins/crazy.gif

[harishivbhakta]

Will being humble mean understanding only your part of the story on your terms? WIll that be right only? If that is true then we will have to change all the vedas and all the other sampradayas including the Shaiv and Shakt sampradayas and make them dance to Gaudiya tune!

[Pankaja_Dasa]

 

 

I presented words of devotees, i didn't concoct anything, I wonder if you even know what Shaivites aspire for. Most aspire to actually become 'Shiva'. Though I think most actually want to serve Lord Shiva. Most do know His true Tattva, and they are very rare, they goto Sada-shiva-loka and become His devotees.

 

SO it is not that Gaudiya Vaishnava's only know. But if a person is offensive to Krishna WHILE worshipping Lord Shiva, then SHiva will make some trick, so he understands or He will simply destroy him [Like Ravana was destroyed].

 

That's what I meant by Ego, [being offensive to Krishna]

[Guest guest]

Oh.. no! There is no question of being offensive to Lord Krsna at all here prabhu! Who can be offensive to Lord Krsna? No true Shaiva or True Vaishnava can ever be offensive to Shiva or Vishnu. That is the point. And both in their own sampradayas do believe that each is the supreme personality of Godhead. Of course you presented the words of devotees and I respect the devotees including yourself. Please accept my humble obeisance!!

[Guest guest]

 

Most do know His true Tattva, and they are very rare,

 

 

This statement negates itself. If most know his true tattva then they can not be rare. Do you want to reword this so we can understand what you are trying to say?

[Pankaja_Dasa]

 

 

Lord Shiva is not the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Krishna is. /images/graemlins/smile.gif Thats the truth. Like I said this is difficult to understand, I guess there will always be arguments about whos bigger. But the fact is we say Lord Shiva is devotee and God at same time. Hare Krishna.

[Yogkriya]

You say Lord Shiva is NOT the supreme personality and I say that LORD SHIVA IS THE SUPREME PERSONALITY!! Krishna was a Shiva devotee, so was Rama!! You may just fail to understand or believe this as his divine grace A.C. Srila Prabhupada did preach the opposite. So you have to follow him. Yes there always were and will always be this argument. Nothing new in this. Point is not this, point is where are you? What is your level? Can you solve your spiritual and material problems? Can you attain the darshana of any of them? Have you attained Krishna sadhna siddhi? If no, then all this talk is bogus inflatting of shallow egotism. Who is bigger or smaller is not going to make any difference in yourself.

Hari om!!

[Pankaja_Dasa]

 

 

I don't know what you wish to gain by saying Shiva is the Supreme Personality, I don't know at all. Lor Shiva has His own abode. If you wish to attain that, then of cource you pray to Him. But when Narada goes to Visit Sada-shiva then Sada-shiva they do kirtan together, this is mentioned in Brihad-bhagavatamtra. In a another story, a devotee called Gopa-kumara goes to Sada-shiva loka and Ganesh tells him, that Shiva and Vishnu are one and the same. And there is Vishnu-dhuta glorfying Lord Shiva, then Lord Shiva put His ears over His head and says No I am servant of Vishnu. Shaites always mention when Rama worshipped Shiva, but they fail to mention when SHiva came from the shiva-liga. And what happened next. Shiva always declares He is a devotee of Rama [Vishnu]. Anyay you do or think what you want, i said so far what i wanted to say.

[Pankaja_Dasa]

 

 

Hari om!!

_

 

I know this is off-topic. But devotees who are mixing in some way with Jnana-yogis [or have done in the past] use this word. Sorry if your not, but it is mosly Impersonalists, who use this term. Hare Krishna is the full meaning, Hari Om means something esle totally. I know it's a small thing, but from experience I know most impersonalists use it, you can also tell if somebody has mixed with them, just if they say these 2 words. /images/graemlins/smile.gif Hare Krishna. Your friend Pankaja das

[Yogkriya]

I especially wrote Hari Om and wanted to see your reaction. For me Hari Om, Hare Krishna, Hare Rama, Shri Govinda means the same!! Not for you. All are names of the same Lord!! Too much technicality keeps the simplicity of bhakti confused. It is good for impressing others with "spiritual" and textual 'intellect'. Impersonalists are not criminals!! They also serve and pray to the Lord in a different way. But they are devotees and should be respected and not said about in an almost abusive way 'oh they are impersonalists'!! The Lord himself says that he can come to the bhakta in whatever way he wants, as friend, father or brother or any other. He shows his eternal universal form where there was not only the form of a seven year old kid playing with cows and gopies!!

And there have been verry very advanced so called 'impersonalist' devotees who have accomplished God-communion (Yoga). So why rebuke them prabhu? Any non-gaudiya topic has to be OFF!!! That is radical.

By the way, Hari is Krishna and OM and Krishna are inseparable. My mind hardly sees any problem! /images/graemlins/smile.gif And that's why I can easily associate with impersonalists and personalists. I love them all. They are also trying to come to the Lord just as we are. You can disagree of course, as I am not strictly being in line with the Gaudiya philosophy.

Your humble servant,

Sanatana.

[Pankaja_Dasa]

 

 

And to me it is not funny. Because they are offensive to KRishna. I don't know why you as Krishna devotee would go out of your way to assocaite with impersonalists. I probabaly have to sometimes, but I def don't talk to them about Krishna. Haribol

[Yogkriya]

Nothing surprising prabhu! I can have the liberty of associating with the impersonalists too just for the above mentioned reasons by myself. I even met some very devoted and loving people amongst them. Ready to give and sacrifice and serve.

I feel suffocated in a narrow minded lane. But primarily, I am a personalist.

Also, remember prabhu how many of us so called Krishna bhaktas become offensive to others while trying to prove our own point to them and to keep our selves above everyone else! I was offensive to a true Shiva bhakta once in order to heavily preach him. He looked a bit annoyed and I told him that I don't care about people like him. Soon within a week's time, I fell very sick and spent rest of the month in bed. That was the punishment Krishna sent me. So I became very careful about it afterwards. This was a Shiva sadhu who came for alms. I soon learnt that their philosophy looks different, but in essence is good and liberating too. I read on really great impersonalist saints and Shaiva saints!! How can I be offensive towards them? Is Krishna limited only to his small cowboy form alone? The universal form doesn't seem to show that at all!

All glories to Harinaam!!

Haril bol!!

[Pankaja_Dasa]

 

 

I know one devotee who thinks like you, and all I can say is his advancment in spiritual life is bewlidering to me. [Meaning his advancing beyond my capcity to understand]. I think what you said is SO TRUE. While preaching we become like almost offensive not realizing that we ourselevles are imperfect. I think this is from the fact we think oursleves as GREAT. AND when you said about being sick, a thought comes to my mind that we cannot act in an agressive way, because we take on the Karmic reactions. If you ever hear Prabhupada preaching in Conversations [i refer you to www.prabhupadavani.org Just listen to all of those and you can see the preaching method. It is not aggressive, SP doesn't force you to understand. This is how your meant to actually preach. But you made me laugh, because I do exactly what you say I shouldn't, and I realized i was doing it just 2 days ago. What a coincidence. Gaura haribol.

[Guest guest]

/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Gaura Haribol!!!!

 

 

[Yogkriya]

Hari bol prabhuji !!!

Krsna bhagwan ki jai!! He teaches us through different sources and makes us realize of our own mistakes. We still have to learn so much and come up in our service.

Y.S.

Sanatana

 

[Guest guest]

do Saivities read bhagavad gita -if so then u have to accept lord krishna as Supreme otherwise u are MAYAVADIS

[chandu_69]

 

remember prabhu how many of us so called Krishna bhaktas become offensive to others while trying to prove our own point to them and to keep our selves above everyone else! I was offensive to a true Shiva bhakta once in order to heavily preach him. He looked a bit annoyed and I told him that I don't care about people like him. Soon within a week's time, I fell very sick and spent rest of the month in bed. That was the punishment Krishna sent me. So I became very careful about it afterwards. This was a Shiva sadhu who came for alms. I soon learnt that their philosophy looks different, but in essence is good and liberating too. I read on really great impersonalist saints and Shaiva saints!! How can I be offensive towards them? Is Krishna limited only to his small cowboy form alone? The universal form doesn't seem to show that at all!

All glories to Harinaam!!

Haril bol!!

 

Profound.Thanks for the Post Yogkriya.