Vishnu-The ultimate aim?

[Guest guest]

Its called Smartha.

 

and it just beats everything ever.

 

Hara OM Hara OM

 

Sivoham

[Guest guest]

(Look at this fool. He does not even know anything about Vedas and where this Upanishad occurs, -----)

 

 

Yes Boss. You know everything. Only you are not a good human being. Spiritulaism is yet to touch you.

[Guest guest]

When one says "Something is Full or perfect", that perfectness is a quality or attribute of that object.

----

 

 

The point is that quality was not the subject of Bhadramurti Ji.

[Guest guest]

****** one should base everything on the acharya, not on one's own concoction.**********

 

Actually some Gurus teach their own cococtions.

[bhadramoorthi]

<p align="center"> </p>

 

"....and that is why Shankara and other Vedantis wrote commentaries on Visnu Sahasranama ?

 

Only a fool like you thinks so Bhadramoorthi..."

===========================================

You spare no opportunity to call me a fool.

Anyway i am now used to it.

 

Your question is why the Vedantis like Sree Sankara explored

Vishnu Sahasranama.

One possible reason is that the Vedantis like Sankaracharya

does not have the view that one diety is different from the

other.We Smarthas are at the same time Sakthas, Vaishnavas,

Saiva, Christian, Muslim etc etc. We dont believe in two

powers.There is only one God .Praising Him/Her through

Vishnu Sahasranamam does not mean that there are many other

Gods also.

 

I had read your post days before and asked Mother for a

possible reason why the same Sankaracharya who wrote

Soundarya-Lahari would write Bhashya to a very lesser hymn

like the Vishnu Sahasranama.She didnot respond instantly but

gave me the reply.It was when I was reading the

November 1st edition of the Spiritual magazine Jyothisha-Rathnam(in Malayalam) , i saw Her reply in that.There was a column about Sankaracharya writing Bhashya.In that, i read the following incident :

 

" ..Sankaracharya, after completing Soundarya Lahari , thought of writing a commentary to Sree Lalitha Sahasranamam. He sat for initiating His work and asked one of His disciples to bring the Lalitha Sahasranama

Grantham(of palm-leaves) from His study.

Sishya brought Him the Grantham and Sankara found that it

was the Vishnu Sahasranamam. He asked sishya to bring the

correct Grantham again, but sishya could find himself

bringing the Vishnu Sahasranamam once again.

Thinking what could have happened to His disciple,

Sankaracharya Himself entered the study and found

Mother Lalithambika sitting there on the floor in the form

of a girl of 8 years,with unequaled beauty, wearing silk

costumes and Her hair covered with flowers of various kinds.

Instantly Sankaracharya realised that it was the Divine

Mother Herself and He folded palms in reverence.

 

She spoke immediately: "Sankara, I was the one who sent Vishnu Sahasranamam to you twice.No need of writing Bhashyam for my Sahasranamam. Your work Soundarya-Lahari is

sufficient. For the common people, to attain merits, the

Vishnu Sahasranamam is enough.Write a Bhashyam for that."

and Mother vanished....." (check the magazine if you want to)

 

 

You see, how Mother made reply to my doubts.Believe in Her and always consult Her for every need of yours. She wont

reject your plea saying that ' you have not surrendered ' or

that 'you have ego' like that.

This incident once again proved to me that She answers every query of Her children. Just call Her with devotion and concentration.

 

I also chant the Vishnu Sahasranamam in some mornings.

Now, I saw that the mother Herself had said that Vishnu

sahasanama is "ENOUGH" for common people to

cross the samsara-sagaram.

 

Eventhough Vishnu names have only one part in 1000000 of the

greatness of Devi-names, it is enough for us humans.Hence

Sankaracharya wrote the Bhashyam.Similar may be the case of

other vedantis.This is the reply of me and my Mother.

[Guest guest]

Dear sir,

When I consulted one astrologer for some problems, he said, Godess Durga will grant all my wishes, and she will immediately answer my prayers. He also said I have a very weak mind, and can be controlled easily, so praying to the godess is a must.

I chant durga sooktham regularly.

But I am eager to know how does the mother answer you questions. She answers like a dream, or comes through an intuition or something? Basically, I myself have felt a small urge not to do somethings when I begin something. If I still do that, I end up in disaster. Can I consider it as mother's voice?

 

But materially, I would say the mother has kept me comfortable, but still, I dont get the respect I deserve, I am being pushed around, I have known enemies and enemies in disguide etc.. etc...

So does chanting Durga sooktham pleases the mother or only lalitha sahasranamam does that?

Please answer my questions.

 

[BinduMadhav]

Bhadramoorthi,

 

You have written a nice reply. It is true that properly trained Hindus recognize only ONE God and all the forms that we worship, Shiva, Vishnu, Devi Parvathi, etc are all His manifestations (or our imaginations depending upon the perspective of the person).

 

I also trust you when you say that you found this story in Jyothisha Rathnam.

 

A few comments.

 

Lalitha is always supposed to be a Shodashi (a 16 year old); when someone portrays her as a 8-year old, alarm bells for the accuracy of the tale toll for me.

 

Secondly, I have studied Lalitha Sahasra Namam, Vishnu Sahasra Namam and the Shiva Sahasra Namam, the latter two from Mahabharatha. Among the three of them, I find Shiva Sahasra Namam to be the most beautiful and profound. It portrays God in the best possible way. This is just a comment on my own personal view; no one needs to agree with it.

 

Thirdly, you write:

 

"Eventhough Vishnu names have only one part in 1000000 of the greatness of Devi-names, it is enough for us humans.Hence Sankaracharya wrote ..."

 

For your information, one million is still a finite number. But the number 1000 represents infinity in Hinduism.

[Pankaja_Dasa]

 

 

How about I worship you? Your also a form. Ever heard of eternal forms? Shiva is shiva, Krishna IS Krishna. They are eternal. Because you cannot understand this, you will always be deluded due to your enviousness of God [Krishna].

[Guest guest]

*****How about I worship you? Your also a form.**********

 

 

One should be able to say and (realize) the following for the ONE worshipped.

 

"The world disappears in him. He is the peaceful, the good, the one without a second."

 

 

For most Indians, this can be said to be equally true for Mother, Shiva or Vishnu, , but not true for others of different culture.

 

But that does not change God and HE is beyond concepts, though He is your very being smiling beneath the turbulent mind.

 

 

Sankaracharya wrote for all varities of bhaktas and gyanis.

 

 

Om Namah Sivayya

 

 

"The world disappears in him. He is the peaceful, the good, the one without a second."

 

[Guest guest]

Krishnaaya Vishvaroopaaya Devakinandanaayacha

Shivabhaktaaya Mitraaya Gitaamritaduhe Namah

 

 

Please explain the above verse and please give the source.

[BinduMadhav]

Krishnaaya Vishvaroopaaya Devakinandanaayacha

Shivabhaktaaya Mitraaya Gitaamritaduhe Namah

 

 

Please explain the above verse and please give the source.

-------------------------

 

The source is myself. Do you still need an explanation? Here it is.

 

To Krishna, the One with Viraat Roopa or Vishva Roopa (since He represents the whole universe), Who makes Mother Devaki happy; The One who is a great devotee of Shiva (according to Mahabharath, Anushaasana Parva), Our greatest friend, and One who provided the sweet milk of Gita (in the form of Bhagavad-Gita), I salute.

 

Krishna is my most favorite. He was a mortal, no matter what fundies believe (I read a funny note from someone that said he stopped aging at 16 or 24 or something like that); and He was, in His mortal life a great devotee of Lord Shiva. His greatness is truly brought down by no less than His own devotees, who have described Him variously of having illicit relations with Radha, having a thousand wives, etc etc. All a bunch of lies.

 

Krishna was the greatest mortal ever to be born on earth and the only mortal worth worshipping.

 

Read one of my earlier articles on Shiva and Vishnu.

 

 

[Guest guest]

"His greatness is truly brought down by no less than His own devotees..."

 

who are these people you refer to?

[Guest guest]

Thanks. Nice composition

[Guest guest]

 

When one says "Something is Full or perfect", that perfectness is a quality or attribute of that object.

----

 

The point is that quality was not the subject of Bhadramurti Ji.

 

 

This is what happens when someone unrelated jumps in the middle to save his partners without understanding context, just like you and Bhadramoorti read Vedas without knowing the context. So much for you ignorant people, running amuck with ego. Fools are you people.

 

Here is a quote of bhadramoorthi who said that

 

It is widely accepted among Hindus that the Brahman is attributeless,

 

 

Then he quoted Purnamidam Purnamadah....for Brahman. So my question. If Brahman is attributeless, then how come you call it perfect or complete etc., which is also an attribute or quality of a THING being spoken about ?

 

Secondly, all mantras have Devatas, Rishis, Chandas etc. So what is it for Isavasya Upanishad ? If you do not know anything about Vedangas, please do not write . all over misleading people.

 

Let not your emotional attachment to your ishta devatas or devis(of devo Bhagavata or whatever unvedic texts) blind you.

 

Lord Visnu is called by different names based on context. This fool Bhadramoorthi thinks Visvam(sahasranama) means matter. Even Shanakara was not of that opinion, and then Bhadra quotes some spurious stories about lalita sahasranama and Sankara. I had a good laugh on that.

 

I cannot correct stubborn foolish people who do not want to learn the correct meanings of Vedas.

[Guest guest]

Hare Krishna,

 

"devis(of devo Bhagavata or whatever unvedic texts) blind you"

 

If you mean Devi Mahatyam, that is not unvedic. It is part of the Markandeya Purana.

 

Your aspiring servant.

[Guest guest]

Ohh, I made a mistake.So sorry.

 

_____-

I cannot correct stubborn foolish people who do not want to learn the correct meanings of Vedas.

_______________________________----

 

What a pity, you want to correct all stubborn fools? Well best wishes.

 

Had you known Vedas or Gita correctly, you would'nt have tried to correct other fools. That is Lord's job. Better correct yourself first. Your language is barely pleasant.

[Guest guest]

Srila Prabhupada

LA, Dec 22 1973

 

Maharaja Yudhisthira went to the northern side. His forefathers were also mahatmas (great souls). Formerly the kings were not licentious drunkards. They were all rishis, as good as great saintly persons, rajarishis. Therefore Bhagavad-gita was taught to the saintly kings. The modern people, they say "Why does this movement not help the poorer-class of men?" They do not know who is poor. Anyone who is poor in spiritual understanding, he is poor. By material opulence, one does not become rich. He is an animal. By material opulence, one may be a polished animal, but he is still an animal. One who is spiritually advanced, he is actually in knowledge. Because the basic principle is spirit. Without spiritual knowledge, any so-called advancement of knowledge, is simply a mistake. Just like if you calculate one mathematical sum and you commit a mistake anywhere, the whole thing is spoiled. The whole thing is spoiled. You go on. You are making progress. But the real mistake was there. It will never carry. The balance will thus not come into being.

 

[Guest guest]

 

If you mean Devi Mahatyam, that is not unvedic. It is part of the Markandeya Purana.

 

 

Yup a Tamasa one.

[Guest guest]

Hare Krishna,

 

Markandeya Purana is rajasic.

 

Your aspiring servant.

[Guest guest]

Very nice story educative and enlightening. Some at least accept their mistake and others think that they are beyond everything and consider all others fools.

 

The latter mistake is fatal and absolutely non-spiritual. And even after reading Gita if one says: "I am not able to correct other fools" , then possibly one is beyond redemption for a long long time.

 

 

 

[Ganeshprasad]

Jai Ganesh

 

Lead us from darkness to light

 

Yup a tamsic no a rajsik, so is it Vedic? I mean did Vasdev write them?

 

So did he write them so that we may reject them because it does not fit in with our sampradaya?

 

Does any one of them lead us to be tamsic or rajsik reading them? Was that the reason why Srila Vyasdev wrote them?

 

Jai Shree Krishna

 

 

[Guest guest]

Jaya Ganesh, Hare Krishna!

 

Thank you Ganeshprasadji for your questions.

 

"Yup a tamsic no a rajsik, so is it Vedic?"

 

Veda means knowledge. Therefore the Vedas contain all types of knowledge. In this age, that knowledge is for all types of people, whatever level their consciousness is at.

 

"I mean did Vasdev write them?"

 

Yes.

 

"So did he write them so that we may reject them because it does not fit in with our sampradaya?"

 

He wrote them because he knew some would not be able to follow the teachings of the sattvic puranas, due to their level of consciousness. He was so merciful to provide something for every level of consciousness so that people could at least make some sort of spiritual progress.

 

"Does any one of them lead us to be tamsic or rajsik reading them? Was that the reason why Srila Vyasdev wrote them?"

 

(1) The tamasic puranas leads one to destroy ignorance

(2) The rajasic leads one to destoy passion

(3) the sattvic leads to transcend goodness (Brahman-realisation)

(4) The Srimad Bhagavatam (spotless Purana) leads to realisation of transcendental identity as loving servant of God.

 

Your aspiring servant.

 

[bhadramoorthi]

<p align="center"> </p>

 

You said:

 

"...If Brahman is attributeless then how can you call it complete or perfect which is also an attribute..."

=====================================

So are you saying that Brahman is not perfect and not complete?

 

I said the supreme Brahman to be perfect only to distinguish IT from the lesser forms(Brahman with forms).

 

I said the supreme Brahman to be complete only to distinguish IT from so many incomplete forms(which are also Brahman).

 

But you guys say Brahman is a man with four hands and two legs and with a plant growing from his navel and with eyes(to see), nose(to respirate?), mouth (for?), lying on a snake, etc etc...

When I said Brahman Has no attributes, I was actually refering to such ridiculous attributes.

 

Brahman in Its Infinity cannot be characterised by any positive attribute, which is expressed by declaring it to be nirguna or beyond all qualification," and again nirvishesha (or beyond all distinction) " ; on the other hand Deities are called saguna or qualified," and savishesha (or conceived distinctively).Only because He is capable of receiving such attributions, which are obtained by an analogical transference into the universal of the diverse qualities or properties of the beings of which He is the Principle.

 

Nirguno Nishkriyo Nithya Nirvikalpo Niranjanaha

Nirvikaaro Niraakaaro Sarva Mukthaihi Labhyaha

 

 

"Attributeless, unattached to work, ever pure in mind, ever blissful, unsullied and formless. He (the absolute) is accessible to all liberated souls."

=====================================================

 

All the names and forms attributed to the Brahman(Atma-tattva) are all our own making.

 

Ramakrishna Paramahamsa used to perform several methods/modes of worship to Mother Kali throughout the day.

 

One day the Divine Mother appeared before him and enquired,

"Ramakrishna! You are getting mad day by day. You worshipped Me in a particular form. Why do you confine Me to this form and that form. In fact, all forms are Mine. Whomsoever you come across, consider them as the embodiments of divinity.God is pure and attribute-less. Such an attribute-less and unsullied divinity is present in every human being. All human beings are, in fact, the reflections of such an omnipresent divinity. Hence, every human being has to be considered as the embodiment of divinity and respected. Though God is omnipresent, He assumes a particular form and serves the human beings in many ways. Right from now, realize this truth that all names and forms are His. Anybody you come across, consider him / her as the embodiment of Divinity. When you develop such an attitude, you can see God anywhere and everywhere..."

 

[bhadramoorthi]

<p align="center"> </p>

 

Guest said:

===========================

The devata of Isavasya Upanishad is Yajna, an avatara of Narayana, who was born to Svayumbuva Manu. Svayambuva Manu is the Rishi for Isavasya Upanishad.

 

================================

Please forgive if I am being foolish in my doubts.

I was not asking who is its devata,rishi,chandas etc when it is used as mantra.I actually dealt with its contents and specifically the shlokam: "..Purnamadah...".

I was asking whether the Isavasya upanishad has anything in favour of your argument that Brahman is Vishnu(or any man with eyes, ears, genitals etc..)

Or please quote anything from It against the "Nirguna Brahman" or "Smartha Theologies" or against "Advaitham".

 

The Isavasya Upanishad derives its name from the opening word of the text "Isavasya" or "Isa", meaning "Lord" that encloses all that moves in the world. Greatly revered, this short Upanishad is often put at the beginning of the Upanishads, and marks the trend toward monotheism in the Upanishads. Its main purpose is to teach the essential unity of God and the world, being and becoming.

It is interested not so much in the Absolute in itself ("Parabrahman") as in the Absolute in relation to the world ("Paramesvara"). It says that renouncing the world and not coveting the possessions of others can bring joy.

[bhadramoorthi]

<p align="center"> </p>

 

Bindu said:

===========================

Lalitha is always supposed to be a Shodashi (a 16 year old); when someone portrays her as a 8-year old, alarm bells for the accuracy of the tale toll for me.

============================

 

Sure, Lalitha is "THARUNI" meaning 'lady of age range 16-35'.

May be the number 16 is significant because Her Mantra form has letters numbered 16 .

Cant She come as an 8-year old, if She wish so?

Your words reveal that you sincerely wish that the story were false.I cant reject the story because Mother gave the story the very next day I asked Her.If you dont want to believe you are free to think it as a fake story.

 

Such stories are told and retold through decades and hence various inconsistencies do arise, but not completely fake.

 

====================================

Secondly, I have studied Lalitha Sahasra Namam, Vishnu Sahasra Namam and the Shiva Sahasra Namam, the latter two from Mahabharatha. Among the three of them, I find Shiva Sahasra Namam to be the most beautiful and profound. It portrays God in the best possible way. This is just a comment on my own personal view; no one needs to agree with it.

====================================

 

Very nice. I am unfortunate. I havent read the Siva Sahasranamam yet. Since you are a Smartha(i hope) it doesnt matter who is your Ishta Deva or which Diety you praise, since simultaneously you admire the other Devathas also and know that they are One.Problem arises only when "para-devatha-Ninda" occurs.

 

=========================================

 

"...For your information, one million is still a finite number. But the number 1000 represents infinity in Hinduism..."

=======================================

 

Great information . Thanks.

If 1000 represents infinity, then my point is again re-inforced.

 

Look at the following quote from Brahmanda puranam:

 

"....Chanting Vishnu names is greater than speaking worldly great things;One name of Shiva is greater than a thousand such names of Vishnu. One name of Devi is greater than a thousand names of Shiva. Of a thousand Sahasranamas dedicated to Devi, Lalita Sahasranama is the most exalted...."

Actually I calculated from the above verse only that Devi names are 1000000 times that of Vishnu.

 

Thanks to inform me that actually the "thousand" in the verse refers to infinite!

 

Then, one name of Devi is equal to infinite Vishnu names.

Great!

True!True!True!

Thanks once again.May Mother bless You.