Swami Narayan and Vallabha on Shiva

[Guest guest]

Thank you maha muni for your interpretation of the shashtras. Too bad it's apasiddhanta. The acharyas don't agree with you.

[Guest guest]

"Thank you maha muni for your interpretation of the shashtras. Too bad it's apasiddhanta. The acharyas don't agree with you"

 

 

 

 

The above three qoutes require no interpretation - they are clear.

[Guest guest]

BG 11.15: Arjuna said: My dear Lord Krishna, I see assembled in Your body all the demigods and various other living entities. I see LORD BRAHMA sitting on the lotus flower, as well as LORD SHIVA and all the sages and divine serpents.

 

BG 11.22: All the various manifestations of LORD SHIVA, the Adityas, the Vasus, the Sadhyas, the Vishvedevas, the two Ashvis, the Maruts, the forefathers, the Gandharvas, the Yakshas, the Asuras and the perfected demigods are beholding You in wonder.

[Guest guest]

"Mahavishnu sleeps on the causal ocean"

 

 

What is the causal ocean? Do you understand what "causal" means? What causes waters (Goddesses) and what causes Maha Visnu above the causal waters?

 

You naive. You fall into your own smartness.

[Guest guest]

"BG 11.22: All the various manifestations of LORD SHIVA, the Adityas, the Vasus, the Sadhyas, the Vishvedevas, the two Ashvis, the Maruts, the forefathers, the Gandharvas, the Yakshas, the Asuras and the perfected demigods are beholding You in wonder"

 

 

I am reading you with wonder. Does that mean anything?

 

Similarly read the other verse and ponder: if 2 people watch a 3rd person then whether the 3rd person become Supreme Lord. Well. Well.

[Guest guest]

"The above three qoutes require no interpretation - they are clear. "

 

It's not like you're presenting the shashtras in a misleading manner or anything. No interpretation? What about everything else you quoted to prove your apasiddhanta?

[Guest guest]

"what causes Maha Visnu above the causal waters?"

 

Krishna cause of everything

[Guest guest]

Supreme Personality of Godhead does not behold anybody with wonder.

 

 

[Guest guest]

"What about everything else you quoted to prove your apasiddhanta?"

 

That is not my interpretation - that is the view of the acharyas in the parampara coming from Brahma.

 

 

 

If it aids your understanding and defeats your prejudice then ignore anything else I said, and just read the following:

 

SB 1.1.1: O my Lord, Shree Krishna, son of Vasudeva, O all-pervading Personality of Godhead, I offer my respectful obeisances unto You. I meditate upon Lord Shree Krishna because He is the Absolute Truth and the primeval cause of all causes of the creation, sustenance and destruction of the manifested universes. He is directly and indirectly conscious of all manifestations, and He is independent because there is no other cause beyond Him. It is He only who first imparted the Vedic knowledge unto the heart of Brahmaji, the original living being. By Him even the great sages and demigods are placed into illusion, as one is bewildered by the illusory representations of water seen in fire, or land seen on water. Only because of Him do the material universes, temporarily manifested by the reactions of the three modes of nature, appear factual, although they are unreal. I therefore meditate upon Him, Lord Shree Krishna, who is eternally existent in the transcendental abode, which is forever free from the illusory representations of the material world. I meditate upon Him, for He is the Absolute Truth.

[Guest guest]

"Supreme Personality of Godhead does not behold anybody with wonder"

 

Supreme personality beholds the creation with love and wonder. Wonder at his own potential.

[Guest guest]

"The Lord in your quote is Ksirodaksayi Vishnu. There is no area where Mahavishnu describes Himself as one with Shiva. In fact Krishna specifically says that his ORIGINAL form is the one he possesses in Bhagavad Gita (i.e. two handed form). Now, if the original form of the Supreme Personality of Godhead is th two-handed Krishna, then how can that simultaneously be the form of Vishnu (four-handed), Shiva (a whole different appearance) and Brahma (who admits that he is subject to material law of death in Brahma Samhita)."

 

 

The original write up of guest identifies Maha Visnu and Krishna as same.

 

Then also states that Maha Visnu lies on causal waters.

 

 

What is caused and what is uncaused? Krishna lying over causal waters cannot be the causal water. He is an effect But The Ahirbudhnaya, waters and MahaVisnu on the waters together is the Brahman.

 

 

Why don't you people show one citation from Vedas speaking of Krishna? Whereas Krishna Himself says He is Maheswara.

 

 

During different times as per the nature of time, Lord appears in different forms. Christ is God. Budhha is God. Prophet is God, But they are all the best manifestations.

 

 

Yoga Vashishta clearly says that Lord Shiva (or whatever name you prefer) is the uncaused one concsiousness. He appears as Visnu at creation and as Rudra at dissolution. He is Krishna.

 

Lord Krishna Himself says so in Gita.

 

The problem is that there is no second person who can give God a name. These names are notions of God only. He calls himself Shiva, Visnu, Brahma but He is ultimately one.

 

 

Whatever name you call Him by is true, since it is His concsiousness. If your mind (limited concsiousness)understands the true meaning of that name then you reach Him. That is why Lord Krishna says that worship me knowing me as Mahesvara.

 

Now there is no problem if you cannot accept that Mahesvara is Shiva provided you realize (true realization and not merely conceptual) that Krishna is in everyone and everyone is in Krishna.

 

If you truly realize what Lord says then name will not be important any more.

 

 

Then you will know that Lord is what transcends OM.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Is this term "Ksirodaksayi Vishnu" mentioned in vedas and upanishads, i have heard only of Mahavishnu. please clear my ignorance

[Ganeshprasad]

Jai Ganesh

Re

(Parabrahman is not divisible in its form as parabrahman. If there is more than one (Brahma, Vishnu, Rudra), then the personalities are expansions of Parabrahman. Krishna is parabrahman, he expands himself as Brahma Vishnu Rudra in order to administer the material world.)

 

The vedas proclaim "Ekam Sata Vipraha Bahudha Vadanti" or "Truth is One but the wise see it in Different Ways".

Since as you accept there is no division but expansion even then there is no argument

Aum purnamidam.

Or, Krishna saying this.

Undivided, yet appears as if divided in beings; He, the object of knowledge, is the creator, sustainer, and destroyer of (all) beings. (13.17)

 

Re

(Srimad Bhagavatam is described as ripened fruit of the trees of the Vedas, and i don't think it mentions Mahesh Dham as a spiritual abode.)

 

You are right he resides in cremation ground.

Still he enters the rasa lila, he is gopisvara. I wonder where his Mahesh abode is situated.

 

 

Re

(The divisions of the eighteen Puranas is defined by Lord Siva to Uma

in the Padma Purana (Uttara Khanda 236.18-21))

" O beautiful lady, one should know that the Visnu, Naradiya,

Bhagavata, Garuda, Padma and Varaha are all in the mode of goodness.

The Brahmanda, Brahma-vaivarta, Markandeya, Bhavisya, Vamana and

Brahma are in the mode of passion. The Matsya, Kurma, Linga, Siva,

Skanda and Agni are in the mode of ignorance.")

 

 

These purans are describing and glorifying three expect of the nature of the supreme lord who is in full control of this gunas, therefore it is easy to understand that in that context.

 

 

 

Re

 

(As for Maheshwara - greatest controller - that I have no dispute. Since Shiva is responsible for the dissolution of the entire material manifestation, he is the greatest controller.)

 

Undivided, yet appears as if divided in beings; He, the object of knowledge, is the creator, sustainer, and destroyer of (all) beings. (13.17)

 

He is the same parabraham undivided.

 

Re

(Krishna is specifically described as source of the spiritual worlds - is there any shastra in the mode of goodness describing Shiva as source of spiritual world?)

 

 

Purans are glorifying in essence, the deity that possesses and controls the said gunas. Each purans extol the predominate deity that is the subject of discussion, what you will find in each one of them somewhere or other the oneness of the supreme Brahman.

 

 

 

Re

(According to Krishna, seeking liberation is still not the purest devotion. Prahlada Maharaja describes how a devotee will seek the welfare of the Supreme Lord - even if it means the devotee having to stay in the material world. The gopis would commit apparent sins like apply dust to Krishna or leave their husbands just to please Krishna.)

 

We are not talking of pure love, since the gopis are liberated great souls there is no question of liberation, I was making a point that great saintly people were worshiping the lord for liberation.

 

Re

(The Lord is always looking to glorify his devotee. Therefore Vishnu and the demigods glorify Shiva for saving the universe.)

 

Glorifying as supreme by prajapati and Vishnu saying we are but one. There is no mention of my devotee any where.

 

Re

(Lord Shiva is for the auspicious development of the three worlds. The three worlds are all part of the material universe.)

 

Where else do you need the auspicious development if not in the material world and who else to grant that but the all auspicious one.

 

Re

(Still there is no mention of him being the Spiritual World's highest personality.)

 

 

How can he be mentioned as highest personality in Bhagvad puran, Lord Krishna is being extolled hear. He can only be same, since there is only one lord. Other purans do extol him. But that is not the subject of our discussion.

 

Re

("O Lord you are self-effulgent and supreme")

 

How clear statement do you want, self-effulgent how can this mean empowered?

 

I have no illusion for the meaning of supreme, however you might want to twist it.

 

 

Re

(One has to understand clearly the three features of Vishnu. Mahavishnu sleeps on the causal ocean. He is the cause of all creation. It is specifically Ksirodaksayi Vishnu (or the maintainer) who declares his oneness with Lord Shiva. Mahavishnu is however, to my knowledge, never described as one with Shiva according to the Shastra.)

 

Krishna in Bg.

Undivided, yet appears as if divided in beings; He, the object of knowledge, is the creator, sustainer, and destroyer of (all) beings. (13.17)

 

Vishnu puran 5.33.46

Yo hariH sa ZivaH sakSad yaH zivaH sa svayamM hariH

Ye tayor bhedamAti stahan narakAya bhave nnaraH

 

Whoever is Lord Hari, He Himself is Lord Shiva indeed.

Any human being mistake both the lord to be different, he/she surely go to hell

 

Brahma vaivarta puran-prakriti khanda II.56.61

 

Sleeping or awake, shiva is constantly absorbed in meditation on Krishna.

As I Krishna, so is Shambhu, ther is no difference between Madhava and Isa.

 

Re

 

( In fact Krishna specifically says that his ORIGINAL form is the one he possesses in Bhagavad Gita (i.e. two handed form). Now, if the original form of the Supreme Personality of Godhead is th two-handed Krishna)

 

Chapter 11.50

 

Sanjaya said to Dhrtarastra: The maha-atma Krsna, while speaking thus to Arjuna, displayed His real four-armed form, and at last He showed him His two-armed form, thus encouraging the fearful Arjuna.

 

 

I think it is this verse you are referring to, please note Krishna displayed his real four armed form. What do you understand by this? And then he showed him his two armed form that is the one that Arjun and rest of the world is familiar with in this avatar.

 

Arjuna said: O Krishna, seeing this gentle human form of Yours, I have now become composed and I am normal again. (11.51)

 

What you are doing is misleading us here, the original form of parabraham is eternal there is no beginning, since we all accept the lord has unlimited form and names, there is no question of original at least all the forms must be original if I can use your word..

 

 

 

Re

(BG says those who worship others are worshipping me, but in a WRONG WAY. If you want to follow the wrong way, go ahead.)

 

Thank you, but we are not discussing the devas worship, but the worship of Krishna as inquired by Arjun.

 

 

Jai Shree Krishna

 

[Guest guest]

"The original write up of guest identifies Maha Visnu and Krishna as same.

 

Then also states that Maha Visnu lies on causal waters."

 

Mahavishnu is one of the personal expansions of Krishna. Shiva is a plenary explansion.

 

 

"What is caused and what is uncaused? Krishna lying over causal waters cannot be the causal water. He is an effect But The Ahirbudhnaya, waters and MahaVisnu on the waters together is the Brahman."

 

 

Krishna expands as Mahavishnu in order to create the material universes. Understand? Krishna in his personal two-handed form is yet higher than the causal ocean. Also, I am not talking about Brahman, I am talking about Parabrahman.

 

 

"Why don't you people show one citation from Vedas speaking of Krishna? "

 

Yajur Veda, The Kalisantarana Upanishad:

 

bhagavata AdipuruShasya nArAyaNasya nAmoccAraNamAtreNa nirdhRtakalir

bhavati| nAradah punah papraccha tannAma kimiti |

 

Tr: "By merely uttering the names of the Primeval Purusha, who is

Bhagavan Narayana, one is freed from the clutches of Kali."

Narada asked again: "What are those names of Narayana?"

 

sa hovaca hiraNyagarbhah |

 

Tr: Lord Brahma said:

 

hare rAma hare rAma rAma rAma hare hare |

 

Tr: O Hari, O Rama, O Hari, O Rama , O Rama O Rama, O Hari, O Hari!

 

hare kRShNa hare kRShNa kRShNa kRShNa hare hare |

 

Tr: O Hari, O Krishna, O Hari, O Krishna , O Krishna O Krishna,

O Hari, O Hari!

 

 

 

"Christ is God. Budhha is God. Prophet is God,"

 

 

Your comment is pure mental speculation, for it is not based on scripture, I elaborate as follows:

Christ: never is Jesus Christ described as God

Buddha: Vishnu avatar

Prophet: is exactly that, a messenger - not to be confused with God.

 

 

 

"Yoga Vashishta clearly says that Lord Shiva (or whatever name you prefer) is the uncaused one concsiousness. He appears as Visnu at creation and as Rudra at dissolution. He is Krishna."

 

 

Yoga Vashishta was a Saivite, so that is to be expected.

 

 

"Shiva, Visnu, Brahma but He is ultimately one"

 

 

Just like it says in Srimad Bhagavatam, Shiva-Vishnu-Brahma are the representation of the Supreme Personality of Godhead in the material manifestation. The key word is REPRESENTATION - not that they are the original form of the Lord.

 

 

"Whatever name you call Him by is true, since it is His concsiousness"

 

There are authorised names, with spiritual potency. These are detailed in the Upanishads e.g. Krishna, Rama, Hari, Narayana. Koran specifies Allah. There are millions of such names. But according to the Upanishads, Krishna has the highest potency - since that is God's original name in his most intimate pastimes in Goloka Vrindavan.

 

 

"Krishna is in everyone and everyone is in Krishna"

 

Yes, but God is simultaneously one with and independent of His creation, so one should worship that Perfect Consciousness that is independent of His creation.

 

 

 

"Then you will know that Lord is what transcends OM."

 

 

And the mantra that transcends OM for this age is Hare Krishna mahamantra.

[Guest guest]

"Is this term "Ksirodaksayi Vishnu" mentioned in vedas and upanishads, i have heard only of Mahavishnu. please clear my ignorance "

 

Name.............Name according to Function

 

Mahavishnu.......Karanodakasayi Vishnu

Garbha-stuti.....Garbhodakasayi Vishnu

Hari.............Ksirodaksayi Vishnu

 

 

All three names on the left are mentioned in the Upanishads. They are specified according to their function for our understanding in the age of Kali.

[Guest guest]

"Undivided, yet appears as if divided in beings; He, the object of knowledge, is the creator, sustainer, and destroyer of (all) beings"

 

yes, Krsna is that undivided Supreme Lord, though he appears divided as Brahma, Vishnu, Rudra.

 

 

"These purans are describing and glorifying three expect of the nature of the supreme lord who is in full control of this gunas, therefore it is easy to understand that in that context."

 

 

Shiva explains that they are 'in the mode of ignorance' not that they are governing the mode of ignorance. Therefore those puranas in the mode of ignorance should be taken to be preliminary stages of the knowledge of God, increasing to the full realisation of Krishna in the Sattvic Bhagavata Purana.

 

 

"He is the same parabraham undivided"

 

That is without basis. If Parabrahman is undivided then how can Brahma-Shiva-Vishnu be Parabrahman? The answer is they are not, as specified in the Srimad Bhagavatam, they are the material manifestation's REPRESENTATION of the Supreme.

 

 

 

"Purans are glorifying in essence, the deity that possesses and controls the said gunas. Each purans extol the predominate deity that is the subject of discussion, what you will find in each one of them somewhere or other the oneness of the supreme Brahman. "

 

 

Not really, because Krishna does not control Sattvic or Rajasic or Tamasic - Krishna controls everything (including three modes) through his expansions and personally controls the transcendental abode. This confirmed in SB Canto 12.

 

 

 

 

"Glorifying as supreme by prajapati and Vishnu saying we are but one. There is no mention of my devotee any where"

 

 

True, just like there is no mention of Krishna's oneness with Shiva in the Srimad Bhagavatam. Supreme can mean many different things - supreme in what sense? materially? spiritual world? But source of all that is manifest and unmanifest, source of spiritual and material worlds - that is clear cut.

[Guest guest]

"And the mantra that transcends OM for this age is Hare Krishna mahamantra."

 

 

The mantra you cited is from Lord only and it is for this time.

 

However, there are other eternal Mantras: Om.

 

 

I repeat: show reference to Krishna and to Maha Visnu from Rig Veda.

[Guest guest]

"Yoga Vashishta was a Saivite, so that is to be expected."

 

Yoga Vashishta is classic written by Valmiki based on teachings of Vashishta to Rama.

 

Neither Rama nor Vashista nor Valmiki are Saivites.

 

Read Maha Narayana Upanishad also. Don't say that was Saivite.

 

The differences percieved by deluded humans are not percieved by Lord who is alone. That is what all scriptures proclaim.

 

 

[Ganeshprasad]

Jai Ganesh

Re

(yes, Krsna is that undivided Supreme Lord, though he appears divided as Brahma, Vishnu, Rudra.)

 

If you read the chapter thirteen you would at least not make a one sided view that you have. Krishna is describing the eternal Brahman which is preceived in all and outside of all,it that principal that creats maintain and destroys, which appears divided.

Yes Krishna is that undivided supreme lord, but he is also Rudra who appears as divided.

 

 

 

Re

 

(Shiva explains that they are 'in the mode of ignorance' not that they are governing the mode of ignorance. Therefore those puranas in the mode of ignorance should be taken to be preliminary stages of the knowledge of God, increasing to the full realisation of Krishna in the Sattvic Bhagavata Purana.)

 

Your logic is astounding, if the purans are in mode of ignorance there is no need of them at all. Some thing that is in ignorance can not give any knowledge, preliminary stage of knowledge is the most important, it is the bases on which the whole foundation is resting. So your statement make no sense.

 

 

Re

 

(That is without basis. If Parabrahman is undivided then how can Brahma-Shiva-Vishnu be Parabrahman?)

 

Only way you can understand is by accepting what Krishna says Rudranam Shankar chAsmi

Undivided, yet appears as if divided in beings; He, the object of knowledge, is the creator, sustainer, and destroyer of (all) beings. (13.17)

 

SB 8.7.23: O lord, you are self-effulgent and supreme. You create this material world by your personal energy, and you assume the names Brahmā, Viṣṇu and Maheśvara when you act in creation, maintenance and annihilation.

 

Re

(True, just like there is no mention of Krishna's oneness with Shiva in the Srimad Bhagavatam. Supreme can mean many different things - supreme in what sense? materially? spiritual world? But source of all that is manifest and unmanifest, source of spiritual and material worlds - that is clear cut. )

 

SB 8.7.21: The prajāpatis said: O deva deva, Mahādeva, Supersoul of all living entities and cause of their happiness and prosperity, we have come to the shelter of your lotus feet. Now please save us from this fiery poison, which is spreading all over the three worlds.

SB 8.7.22: O lord, you are the cause of bondage and liberation of the entire universe because you are its ruler. Those who are advanced in spiritual consciousness surrender unto you, and therefore you are the cause of mitigating their distresses, and you are also the cause of their liberation. We therefore worship Your Lordship.

 

SB 8.7.23: O lord, you are self-effulgent and supreme. You create this material world by your personal energy, and you assume the names Brahmā, Viṣṇu and Maheśvara when you act in creation, maintenance and annihilation.

SB 8.7.24: You are the cause of all causes, the self-effulgent, inconceivable, impersonal Brahman, which is originally Parabrahman. You manifest various potencies in this cosmic manifestation.

SB 8.7.25: O lord, you are the original source of Vedic literature. You are the original cause of material creation, the life force, the senses, the five elements, the three modes and the mahat-tattva. You are eternal time, determination and the two religious systems called truth [satya] and truthfulness [ṛta]. You are the shelter of the syllable oḿ, which consists of three letters a-u-m.

 

Let us read this verses again, you are super soul all living entity.(21) those advanced in spiritual consciousness surrender on to you(22) does this sound like lord of material world only?

Self effulgent and supreme, your personal energy(23)

(24) read again and again cause of all causes

the source of vedic literature the eternal time, the shelter of the syllable om.(25)

whose description but parabrahman can this be, prajapati’s prayer to lord Shiva.

Sridhar maharaj who wrote commentary on Bhagvad puran said those who think Krishna and Shiva to be different are only engage in useless discourse.

 

Jai Shree Krishna

 

[Guest guest]

"I repeat: show reference to Krishna and to Maha Visnu from Rig Veda"

 

 

So you base all your beliefs on the Supreme on just the Rig Veda?

[Guest guest]

"If you read the chapter thirteen you would at least not make a one sided view that you have. Krishna is describing the eternal Brahman which is preceived in all and outside of all,it that principal that creats maintain and destroys, which appears divided.

Yes Krishna is that undivided supreme lord, but he is also Rudra who appears as divided."

 

 

 

Krsna and Rudra are both the Supreme Lord? When they are undivided? Can you please logically explain that statement?

 

Rudra beholds Krsna with wonder in the Bhagavad Gita. Can you explain how that can be if Krsna and Rudra are undivided?

 

If the Srimad Bhagavatam says that the Lord divides himself when entering into the material manifestation, that clearly shows that the consequential representations (Brahma-Vishnu-Rudra) are the products of that division, not the cause.

 

 

 

 

"Your logic is astounding, if the purans are in mode of ignorance there is no need of them at all. Some thing that is in ignorance can not give any knowledge, preliminary stage of knowledge is the most important, it is the bases on which the whole foundation is resting. So your statement make no sense"

 

 

Shiva says so. All the religions except those coming from the Vedas are described as mleccha dharma, or not even qualified for mode of ignorance. Yet God sends those religions down also, so even they serve some purpose according to time, place and circumstance. The next stage from mleccha dharma is destroying ignorance, that is where Shiva, the all-merciful Lord of the material world serves his purpose. Those who are intelligent worship Shiva in order to get his mercy so that they may receive the favour of the Supreme Lord who also created Shiva i.e Krsna. That is why Shiva pulls all the stops and convinces Yogamaya to give him access into the gopi pastimes.

 

 

 

"Only way you can understand is by accepting what Krishna says Rudranam Shankar chAsmi

Undivided, yet appears as if divided in beings; He, the object of knowledge, is the creator, sustainer, and destroyer of (all) beings. (13.17)"

 

If this is from Bhagavad Gita, please see the proper translation. Please do not mix two different quotes from the Bhagavad Gita together. You mix the Rudra quote from Chapter 10 and mention the Chapter 13 quote as if it is a direct purport.

 

Although the Supersoul appears to be divided among all beings, He is never divided. He is situated as one. Although He is the maintainer of every living entity, it is to be understood that He devours and develops all.

 

The Lord is situated in everyone's heart as the Supersoul. Does this mean that He has become divided? No. Actually, He is one. The example is given of the sun: The sun, at the meridian, is situated in its place. But if one goes for five thousand miles in all directions and asks, "Where is the sun?" everyone will say that it is shining on his head. In the Vedic literature this example is given to show that although He is undivided, He is situated as if divided. Also it is said in Vedic literature that one Vishnu is present everywhere by His omnipotence, just as the sun appears in many places to many persons.

 

 

"O deva deva, Mahadeva, Supersoul of all living entities"

 

The real meaning behind this is wonderfully explained by Lrod Brahma in the Brahma Samhita. (Sambhu = Shiva)

 

BS 5.7: Kṛṣṇa never consorts with His illusory energy. Still her connection is not entirely cut off from the Absolute Truth. When He intends to create the material world the amorous pastime, in which He engages by consorting with His own spiritual [cit] potency Ramā by casting His glance at the deluding energy in the shape of sending His time energy, is an auxiliary activity.

 

BS 5.8: [The secondary process of association with Māyā is described.] Ramādevī, the spiritual [cit] potency, beloved consort of the Supreme Lord, is the regulatrix of all entities. The divine plenary portion of Kṛṣṇa creates the mundane world. At creation there appears a divine halo of the nature of His own subjective portion [svāḿśa]. This halo is divine Śambhu, the masculine symbol or manifested emblem of the Supreme Lord. This halo is the dim twilight reflection of the supreme eternal effulgence. This masculine symbol is the subjective portion of divinity who functions as progenitor of the mundane world, subject to the supreme regulatrix [niyati]. The conceiving potency in regard to mundane creation makes her appearance out of the supreme regulatrix. She is Māyā, the limited, nonabsolute [aparā] potency, the symbol of mundane feminine productivity. The intercourse of these two brings forth the faculty of perverted cognition, the reflection of the seed of the procreative desire of the Supreme Lord.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

"So you base all your beliefs on the Supreme on just the Rig Veda?"

 

Yes, definitely.

 

Rig Veda is the fountain head and eternal. Source and the effect. What is not there is latter addition (by the Lord alone). But what is added later is temporal. Rig Veda is eternal.

 

[Guest guest]

"The real meaning behind this is wonderfully explained by Lrod Brahma in the Brahma Samhita. (Sambhu = Shiva)"

 

Shambhu is Shayambhu the uncaused original eternal being. If He manifests in Brahma or Visnu does not mean that the latter give birth to Shambhu.

 

If you attain Self Realisation Shambhu will manifest in you.

 

 

Whereas in Rig Veda it is cleary mentioned that Visnu is born on waters. That is also Shambhu.

 

[Guest guest]

BS 5.8: The divine plenary portion of Krishna creates the mundane world. At creation there appears a divine halo of the nature of His own subjective portion Svamsha, This halo is divine Shambhu, the masculine symbol or manifested emblem of the Supreme Lord. This halo is the dim twilight reflection of the supreme eternal effulgence. This masculine symbol is the subjective portion of divinity who functions as progenitor of the mundane world, subject to the supreme regulatrix [niyati].

 

 

 

 

In other words, Shiva is divine, but not quite the same as Krishna.

[Guest guest]

The Rig-veda continues elsewhere (1.154.4-5): “Him whose three places that are filled with sweetness and imperishable joy, who verily alone upholds the threefold, the earth, the heaven, and all living beings. May I attain to His well-loved mansion where men devoted to the Gods are happy. For there springs the well of honey [or Soma] in Vishnu’s highest step.”