Difference Between the Devotees of Krishna and Shiva

By His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada

Devotee of KrishnaShiva is dahi (yoghurt) and Krishna is milk. When you take pure milk and mix it with a little sour thing, it becomes dahi (yoghurt). Similarly, Krishna is pure spirit, and when this pure spirit is mixed up with maya, then that is Shiva. Lord Shiva is maya-adhipati. It was once inquired by Yudhisthira Maharaja that Lord Shiva, although he appears to be like a beggar, who does not possess even a house and lives underneath a tree, his (Shiva’s) devotees become very rich and opulent materially. Whereas although Lord Vishnu is lakṣmi-pati (husband of Lakṣmi, the goddesss of fortune) and vaikuntha-pati (master of the Spiritual World), the Vaisnavas (devotees of Vishnu) become beggars. Just opposite. By worshiping the beggar one becomes rich, and by worshiping the rich one becomes a beggar. Why is this contradiction?

So this is answered by Krishna, yasyāham anugrhnāmi harisye tad-dhanam sanaih [SB 10.88.8], “My first benediction to my devotee is that

I take away all his riches.” That’s all. Then when he becomes helpless, he becomes firmly convinced and when he has no other shelter, then automatically he takes shelter of Krishna. This is what Krishna demands, sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekam [Bg. 18.66]. When he has no other help, he fully surrenders to Krishna. That is Krishna’s special mercy.

And so far Lord Shiva is concerned, he is the husband of mother Durgā, the supreme material power, srsti-sthiti-pralaya sādhana-saktir ekā chāyeva yasya bhuvanāni vibharti durgā [Bs. 5.44]. So the devotee of Shiva gets all material benediction, and Vaishnava, instead of material benediction, he gets all spiritual benediction. That is the difference.

[An excerpt from a lecture delivered on April 13, 1975 in Hyderabad, India]

Also Read

WHO IS THE GREATEST – BRAHMA, VISHNU OR SHIVA?

WHAT IS THE POSITION OF LORD SHIVA?

DONATION TO DURGĀ IS A BRIBE

Advertisements

175 thoughts on “Difference Between the Devotees of Krishna and Shiva

    • The Bhagavatam describes about the war between between Krishna and Shiva. Krishna emerged victorious. Similarly there have been wars between vaishnavas and shaivas, and the vaishnavas (devotees of Krishna) have always emerged victorious. Therefore the shaivas have stopped fighting. That’s because they know their fate – they will have to face defeat. Please visit this link – http://e-vedas.com/elib_3.htm – and download the Krishna book available in three volumes (free download available). In the third volume, please read chapter 88 – “The Deliverance of Lord Shiva”. This Krishna book is an English translation of the Srimad Bhagavatam wherein Vyasadeva describes the greatness of Krishna and how he delivered Shiva from a demon in Chapter 88. Elsewhere, in the same book there is a vivid description of the war between Krishna and Shiva, wherein Shiva was defeated by Krishna, the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

      Like

      • Those people who make difference between Lord Krishna and Lord Shiva are fake, low mentality. Don’t know anything about the Supreme Power. These people are making business that’s all. These people only create wrong rumours about the Supreme One.

        Like

        • Dear Mr. Tejas Mishra,

          In fact those who profess equality among various gods are making business. If you have a temple of one deity only, say Lord Vishnu, then only the devotees of Vishnu will visit. Naturally, when one visits the temple he makes a donation or an offering to the deity out of love or out of obligation, as the case may be. It is enjoined in the scriptures that one should offer something to the deity. Whereas it is the duty of the temple managers to utilize the money in the service of the Lord. But the so-called brahmanas, who have made the temple a money making business, utilize such collections for their own sense gratification.

          To increase collections, they install many more deities so that devotees of all the other deities will also visit. Thus the increased number of devotees leads to increased collections. If you only have a Shiva deity, then the devotees of Lord Vishnu, Lord Ganesa, Godess Durga, and many more such gods will not visit that temple. But if these other deities are installed, then their devotees will also start visiting. Thus more money is collected due to the increased number of “customers”.

          So, in order to further their own ends, such money-making professionals, in the garb of priests, profess that all gods are equal. How can there be many Supreme Powers. As the name itself suggests, Supreme means only one. ekam brahma dvitiyam nasti.

          In fact we are losing out on a lot of money by sticking to the truth that “Krishna is Supreme”. Therefore the devotees of Krishna are poor as outlined in the above article.

          Hare Krishna.
          Niraj Bidawatka

          Like

          • Why so discrimination even in the gods?? The only absolute truth is Soul “Atma”. If you are pure devotee then you shouldn’t see any discrimination in god for showing difference between god is a business not action of a devotee..

            Like

          • Dear do u get lord vishu… I don’t think so because if u, u will never ever discrimination. Between u and other , and also not between God… Plz first understand urself
            …either Shiva or Vishnu not come 😃 both of them definitely come…😝

            Like

          • YOU ARE A NERD FOOL ,UR KRISHNA EVEN DONT LIKE YOU BECAUSE KRISHNA IS LORD SHIVAS PRIME DEVOTEE ,HE SAYS IN BRAMHA VAIVARTA PURAN THAT RADHA IS HER HEART BUT SHIVA IS HIS ATMAN .THE ONE WHO CHANTS NAME OF MAHADEVA KRISHNA WOULD FOLLOW HIM IN FEAR WITH HUMILITY TO LISTEN NAME OF HIS ORIGINATOR FATHER AGAIN AND AGAIN .
            U UNLEARNED FALSE PSYCOPHANTS READ MAHABHARAT KRISHNA DID PENENACES FOR SHIVA ,ADDRESSED HIM AS GOD ISHTA OF HIM AND VISHNU AND IN VISHNU SFORM HE WORSHIPS AND SERVES SHIVA ALWAYS AND ONLY
            SHREE VISHNU THE PRIME SHAIWA HIMSLEF SAYS IN KURMA PURAN THOSE WHO WORSHIP ME RIGHTLY BUT DONT WORSHIP SHIVA OR USE FOUL LANGUAGE FOR MY LORD SHIVA I SEND THEM TO NARAKA
            THIOSE WHO WANTS KRISHNA GRACE MUST WORSHIP SHIVA THE LORD GOD OF KRISHNA AND THIS IS WRITTEN IN VEDAS AND IN PURANS
            YOUR BLAH FALSE RANTING IS ONLY BIASED POLITICALY MOTIVATED NOT BHAKTI TRUE BHAKTA WONT ENCOURAGE THESE MUD SLINGS
            AND THIS IS FACT AS SHINING SUN SHIVA IS LORD OF ALL VISHNU IS HIS PART AND FOREMOST DEVOTEE HE ALWAYS WORSHIPS ON FEET OF SHIVA

            Like

          • We are not fools . ” Ekam bhraam dwtiys na nasti “. Means their is only one God, not two.
            Stop fooling people , by changingeanimg of Sanskrit words.
            Now, people understand Sanskrit .you cantake them fools.

            Like

        • Tejas,

          I think you are right. As per saamkhya philosophy, there is only purusha as well as prakrithi and all the gods are manifestations of Purusha and goddesses being manifestations of prakrithi.

          Those who differentiate between gods or goddess shows only avidya or lack of knowledge of atmavidya.

          Also when they say Shiva devotees become rich as Shiva is the husband of Parashakthi, I think the same holds good even for Godess Lakshmi as she is considered the goddess of wealth.

          Like

      • No dear. Even though your bogus scripture SB shows Krishna Victorious, but the truth found in Vedas is that it is Lord Shiva who is invincible and one who cannot be defeated.

        Like

            • no one has the right to discriminate between the gods not even devotees…and besides there is a reason why they call lord shiva as “MAHADEV”.. i m not telling that he is the only supreme deity…but every one of the tridevs is the same…dont forget that lord vishnu himself got the sudarshan chakra from lord shiva…

              Like

          • Don’t read iskon books they are fake. Changes the old stories and always use your head. Don’t believe blindly on any books as all books written by humans and sometimes they have their hidden agendas !

            Like

        • shut up your shaivaite purana are fake we all know how your shiva ran away in banasura episode krishna spared banasura because he is grand son of prahlada btw all shiva devotees are demons ravan, hiranyakashyap, hiranyaksha, jarasanda all these demons are shiva devotees but lord vishnu took birth and he killed all the shiva demon devotee jarasanda is shiva devotee bhima is vishnu devotee bhima killed jarasanda your shiva failed to save his devotees all shiva devotees are demons all these demons are more dangerous than pakistan terrorist lashkar e toiba.

          Like

      • Dear, iskon people 😂. You can wright many imaginary stories how much you want. Just look at the dislike button . So, you will get the idea that most of the Hindu population are not fools to belove you.
        So, stop this .stop hating lord Shiva and other God and their devoties.
        Se where so started jahady God and no other God . Same like Islam !

        Like

    • mani-shut ur mouth iam not follower of isckon iam south indian brahmin but lord vishnu is supreme god shiva is not supreme you dont anything about hindusim iam not follower of isckon iam brahmin from south india but i support isckon only lord vishnu is supreme god

      Like

  1. Shiva is superior to Vishnu. Vishnu is a mere deva (demigod) who protects the island of Sri Lanka. He is subordinate to Sakra (Indra) and will eventually die and be reborn in the lower worlds.
    But Shiva is beyond the devas. He is Lokeshvara, Lord of the World, a manifestation of the Eternal Buddha Vairocana. In wrathful form, he is Mahakala.
    You are comparing a drop of milk to a lake of butter. Vishnu is a mere deva. He will die and fade away. But Shiva is eternal. He may change bodies (for nothing is permanent) but the Lord will always be.

    Like

    • Krishna says in the Bhagavad Gita (10.2), aham adir hi devanam: I am the source of all the devas (demigods). So Krishna is not a demigod as you propose because you have got some wrong information from some wrong sources. You have to refer to the Bhagavad Gita for the correct information.The Bhagavad Gita informs that Krishna is the the Almighty Supreme God. Krishna is source of even Vishnu. However when is you say that Vishnu is subordinate to Shiva, it exposes your lack of true and factual knowledge. Lord Vishnu does not die and fade away. He is beyond birth and death. The Bhagavad also informs, janma karma ca me divyam. The birth and activities of Krishna are spiritual. One who understands them factually transcends the cycle of birth and death.

      Like

      • god never tells that he is supreme..he is everywhere,no need to find him only in temples,there is a saying that if u want to preach then do some good preachings rather than that dont tell some stupid ideologies,this is what isckon is doing all these days.one more thing god created diff people with diff talents to share it nd to lead a life with full of peace nd harmony not to differentiate amongst ourselves,but these isckon people are not only differentiating human beings but also gods…great all hail isckon.

        Like

        • Dear Mr. Sagar,

          Your statement, “God never tells that He is Supreme”, exposes the fact that you have not read the Bhagavad Gita. In the Bhagavad Gita, God Himself has emphatically stated that He is God. So please read the Bhagavad Gita before pasing such ignorant remarks.

          On one hand you are saying that one should not differentiate amongst ourselves and on the other hand you are contradicting yourself by branding us as stupid. So why are you differentiating us as stupids. So you should first practice what you preach. You should not differentiate some as stupids and some as wise.

          But the fact is that your tenet of “non-differentiation” is untenable because the creation of God is full of variety and thus differentiation between objects and creatures is unavoidable. Therefore you cannot stop comparisons. Hence you have also made differentiations and categorized us as “stupids”.

          So difference does exists and there is nothing wrong in making comparisons. Similarly there is difference between the devotees of Krishna and the various demigods and that is exactly what the captioned post is discussing about.

          Hare Krishna.
          Niraj Bidawatka

          Like

      • Dear Hare Krishna Revolution,

        Hare Krishna! firstly I am a devotee of Shiva but I love Krishna in my heart and I do attend Bhagavad Gita discourses on a timely basis. I chant the Panshakshara and the Hare Krishna Maha Mantra without fail. I read various Vaishnava & Shaiva texts.

        I would like to re-quote from the phrase by Krishna himself “says in the Bhagavad Gita (10.2), aham adir hi devanam: I am the source of all the devas (demigods).” and also another phrase from chapter 10, Text 24 senaninam aham skandah
        sarasam asmi sagarah; of all commanders I am; skandaḥ, Kārtikeya.

        The Lord Himself have showed his Viswaroopa, the universal form to Arjuna where to indicate and enlighten him that he is source of everything, includes various deities,Devas, Bhotas, Saints, animals, other beings and planets (cosmos).

        Lord Krishna continue to state that He accepts any kind of devotion towards him in any kind of form and worship as long with pure devotion. Hence I don’t see anything to argue and indicate which deity/religious group is superior then the other?

        However, I should agree that some of these temples and priests are just taking advantage of this and installing various deities as source of incomes or business, but they are using this truth as an opportunity and confusing the devotees.

        “Lokah samastah sukhino bhavantu”

        May peace and truth prevail throughout the universe!

        Aum Tat Sat

        Nimal Arulanantha

        Like

      • Just for your information Bhagwat geeta is not about Krishna.
        It is about Shiva. Krishna is a medium and Shiva is actual Speaker. For proof,Whenever krishna speaks in srimad bhagwatmaha puran it is wriiten krisna uwach but in bhagwat geeta it is wriiten sribhagwan uwach and throughout all puranas and vedas term sribhagwan only used for Shiva only.

        Like

        • shiva devotees are demons ravan is shiva devotee vishnu avatar ram killed ravana, hiranyakashyap is shiva devotee narasimha killed hiranyakashyap, hiranyaksha is shiva devotee varaha killed hiranyaksha, kumbhakarna is shiva devotee ram killed khumbhakarna our lord vishnu killed so many shiva devotees in his avtars but your shiva never killed single vishnu devotee thirupathi is world richest vishnu temple even his temple is more powerful than other gods so only lord vishnu is supreme god

          Like

    • where do you get your information from? Fantasia? Have you seen Lord Vishnu to know where He is and what He is? Take your head out of your ass and read bonafide scripture or you will forever be a walking shit head. Okay I’m done insulting your poor integrity but I’d like to tell you that Lord Shiva is very dear to me… He is also dear to Lord Vishnu, so you insult Lord Shiva by insulting Lord Vishnu… such a shame because if you knew anything at all about Lord Shiva you would’ve hastened to be so rude to the Lord that Lord Shiva Meditates upon. When Krsna appeared, Lord Shiva wanted to get Darshana like all the other Demi Gods for this form of the Lord was very rare. He disguised Himself as a beggar and went to meet baby Vishnu. The beautiful Lord and Lord Shiva share many beautiful past times together and play with one another, without speaking they understand each other… so who are you with your limited arrogant little brain in all this? Not even a fragment of dust… Try to think next time…

      Like

    • Omg frnd dnt evn try..u r terrible at ur knowledge..brahma is d creator vishnu preserver shiva transformer nd dey hve subsequent gunas..rajas satva and tamas..an enlightened soul is d one who has d balance of all d three gunas i.e krishna tht is why he iz d supersoul free of any gunas

      Like

    • shiva devotees are demons ravan is shiva devotee vishnu avtar ram killed ravana, hiranyakashyap is shiva devotee narasimha killed hiranyakashyap, hiranyaksha is shiva devotee varaha killed hiranyaksha, kumbhakarna is shiva devotee rama killed kumbhakarna, lord vishnu killed so many shiva devotees in his avatars jarasanda is shiva devotee bhima is vishnu devotee bhima killed jarasanda your shiva failed to save his devotees but your shiva never killed single vishnu devotee thirupathi is world richest vishnu temple even his temple is more powerful than other gods so only lord vishnu is supreme god

      Like

  2. Alright, the shiva sutras say that Shiva is the totality and reality of universal consciousness that humans being bounded by malas see only the phenonmenal (excuse the spelling) world; now go read your own gita: doesn’t that tell the identical information supplanting the name of shiva for Krishna? man go have a read on monism ISCKON dudes and stop f***ing around with who’s the bigger boss. they are one and the same, call him YHWH if you will ( I am that I am) that’s probabely the fittest name for OUR (every sweet son of god) lord.
    non-relevant shit (who’s better, beggar/guru…) like this really sickens me.

    Like

    • HARI BOL
      JAI ACHARYAS!
      There are Puranas in sattva, rajas, tamas and shuddha sattva. Bhagavatam is amala Puranam or spotless. It is in suddha sattva, beyond three gunas. So, Lord Krsna is certainly supreme. Read Tattva Sandarbha and Paramatma Sandarbha by Jiva Goswami. Tamasic and rajasic puranas are to delude atheists and avaisnavas.
      Only few souls revive dormant Hari Bhakti. http://www.vedabase.net/bg/7/3/en2
      Lord says in Bg 15.15 that he is in everyone’s heart and gives remembrance, knowledge and forgetfulness. Forgetfulness is for envious Prakriti janas.
      In chapter 7 Lord says that he fulfils desire to worship A demigod. It is Lord’s mercy that Saivites think Siva to be supreme. But Absolute Truth is always Visnu tattva.
      http://www.veda.harekrsna.cz/encyclopedia/siva.htm
      Visit page of Mahajana Param Vaishnava Lord Shiva
      http://www.fb.com/SIVAVAISHNAVA
      JAI NITAI GAURACHANDRA

      Like

        • Dear Mr. Nilalohita, you have failed to cite the exact mantras wherein the Vedas have proclaimed Lord Shiva as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Thus your statement has no value. The Srimad Bhagavatam is the essence of the Vedas, and it clearly proclaims that Krishna is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. krsnas tu bhagavan svayam (SB 1.3.28) The Bhagavad Gita is considered the essence of the Upanisads, or Vedas. Krishna mentions therein (Bg. 15.15) that He (Krishna) is to be known by studying the Vedas. It is nowhere mentioned in the Bhagavad Gita that Lord Shiva is the Personality of Godhead. The entire Bhagavad Gita, which the essence of the Vedas, proclaims and reiterates that Krishna is the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

          Niraj Bidawatka.

          Like

          • And it’s not Mr., it’s Ms. Well if you believe that there exists no such verse, then take this:

            OM NAMO BHAGAVATE RUDRAYA (Yajurveda, Taitiriya Aranyaka).
            Now mind that, Prabhupada says that Bhagavata or Bhagavan is a word used for The Supreme Personality of Godhead. And the above verse is taken AS-IT-IS from the Sri Rudram section of Yajurveda.

            And as far as Bhagavad Gita is concerned, then take a look at this:

            “Yet in this body (deha / kshetra) there is another, a transcendental enjoyer who is MAHESHVARA (Shiva), the supreme proprietor, who exists as the overseer and permitter, and who is known as Paramatma,the Supreme soul of universe”. (Bhagavad Gita 13.23)

            See, Lord Krishna himself is declaring Lord Shiva as Supreme.

            Now, let’s see who is Supreme according to Vedas:

            “OM NAMO BHAGAVATE RUDRAYA” (Yajurveda, Taitiriya Aranyaka, Sri Rudram, Anuvaka 1)

            See, Yajurveda addresses Lord Rudra as The Supreme Personality of Godhead.

            “purusho vai rudrah” (Yajurveda, Taittirya Aranyaka 10:24:1)

            Yajurveda addresses Lord Rudra as The Supreme Purusha.

            Lord Shiva himself says:-
            “paramo.asmi paraatparaH” (Maitreya Upanishad 3:10)
            “I am the supreme, greater than the great”.

            “namo girishaya cha shipivishhtaya cha |” (Sri Rudram Anuvaka 5)

            Salutations to Him who dwells on the mount Kailasha and who is in the form of Shipivista (Vishnu).

            “sá yád dhruva´? dísam ánu vyácalad ví??ur bhutva´nuvyàcalad vira´jam annadi´? kr?tva´ |” (Atharva Veda 15:14:5)
            “He (Vratya/Shiva), when he went away to the steadfast region, went away having become Vishnu”.

            “soma? pavate janita matina? janita divo janita p?thivya? |
            janitaghnerjanita suryasya janitendrasya janitota vi??o? |” (RV 9:96:5)
            “Father of holy hymns, Soma flows onward the Father of the earth, Father of heaven:
            Father of Agni, Surya’s generator, the Father who begat Indra and Vishnu”.

            Now let’s see what is Vishnu’s position:

            “soma? pavate janita matina? janita divo janita p?thivya? |
            janitaghnerjanita suryasya janitendrasya janitota vi??o? |” (RV 9:96:5)
            “Father of holy hymns, Soma flows onward the Father of the earth, Father of heaven:
            Father of Agni, Surya’s generator, the Father who begat Indra and Vishnu”.

            “vishhNorjanaka.n devamiiDyaM” (Sharabha Upansiahd 1-2)
            “[Shiva]who is the father of Vishnu and other devas”.

            “rudraatpravartate biijaM biijayonirjanaardanaH |” (Rudra Hridayopanishad 8)
            “Rudra is the generator of the seed. Vishnu is the embryo of the seed”.

            “umaa sha~Nkarayogo yaH sa yogo vishhNuruchyate |” (Rudra Hridayopanishad 11)
            “The combination of Uma and Sankara is Vishnu”.

            “kaarya.n vishhNuH kriyaa brahmaa kaaraNa.n tu maheshvaraH |
            prayojanaartha.n rudreNa muurtirekaa tridhaa kR^itaa |” (Rudra Hridayopanishad 15)
            “The effect is Vishnu. The action is Brahma. The cause is Maheshvara. For the benefit of the worlds. Rudra has taken these three forms”.

            When Vishnu, through thine (Indra’s) energy, strode wide those three great steps of his, then thy two beautiful Bay Steeds carried thee on. (Rig-Veda 8:12:27)

            Vishnu, Varuna, Mitra sing thy (Indra’s) praise: In thee the Maruts’ company have great delight. (Rig-Veda 8:15:9)

            This majesty of his, Vishnu extols and lauds, making the stalk that gives the meath flow forth with might (Rig-Veda 10:113:2)

            “Step forth with wider stride, my comrade Vishnu; make room, Dyaus, for the leaping of the lightning. Let us slay Vrtra, let us free the rivers let them flow loosed at the command of Indra” (Rig-Veda 8:89:12)

            Comments:

            If Lord Shiva is not Supreme, then why do Vedas and Upanishads praise him as such?

            If Lord Shiva is a Vaishnava, then why do Vedas claim Vishnu to be his son? A father is greater to his son.

            if Vishnu is supreme what is the need for him to use Indra’s energy?

            Vishnu, Varuna, Mitra sing thy (Indra’s) praise: In thee the Maruts’ company have great delight. (Rig-Veda 8:15:9)

            If Vishnu is supreme lord, what is the need for him to sing Indra’s praise??

            Why does Vishnu always Extols and lauds Indra’s majestic glory.

            Why did Vishnu work at the command of Indra? Can Indra dare to command his boss?

            Like

            • Nilalohita let me tell you whats bogus… Shiva Puran is bogus… There was Linga Puran – no Shiva Puran. In 18 puranas, Srimad Bhagavata is a Maha Purana – calling it bogus is telling Adi Guru Shankaracharya, who prostrated before Srimad Bhagavatam, that he was stupid in doing so. He accepted SB to be the most pure and unabridged truth about the Supreme Personality of Godhead and expressed his incapacity and incapability to give a commentary on it.

              In the end of his life he told his closest followers to discard all that he taught and only follow Srimad Bhagavatam. I hope you remember the song he sang and through, which he said to all, Bhaj Govindam Bhaj Govindam Bhaj Govindam “MUDH mate”.

              Now Adi Guru was none other than Lord Shiva himself. And all this that I have stated are recorded facts of Adi Guru Shankaracharya. Do you mean to say Lord Shiva knows less than you? Oh but you already have said that. Only now you have realised whether you are a fool or not and to the degree has your foolishness been manifesting.

              I would not have been so hard hitting had you known where your place is.

              Like

              • Mr rishi
                Stop saying other people fool rather then looking at yourself first n ha one more thing is it is you who are making difference between lord Shiva n lord Krishna so that devotee start fighting with each other n then you people to increase your own business spread such rumours about Krishna n lord Shiva because in whole Bhagavad Gita lord Krishna never said that make difference between them n if lord Shiva is not supreme then y lord Krishna says that he by worshipping lord Shiva lord Krishna worshipping himself so it’s a common sense that which proves that they both are on n the same n if it is wrong according to you all then lord Krishna is wrong n even the great tulsidasji is also wrong who has been declared greatest devotee of Krishna by writing Ramacharitmanas in which he has said that the one who makes any difference between lord Shiva n lord Hari vl never get moksha so even he is wrong because his written books are not matching with your written books am i rite so that’s y you peole says that his book is not authorized books, please spread the Hare Krishna mantra all over the universes but by pure devotion not by making difference between lord Krishna n lord Shiva

                Like

              • Dear sir, cool down. Anger is your enemy. Do you have any proof that Shiva Purana is bogus? There must be an authentic evidence for this argument of yours. Is there any, other than interpolations made in Padma Purana? You must be aware that Acharyaji was an exponent of Advaita, according to which, Gods all forms (Shiva, Shakti and Vishnu) are one and same, and also that God and soul are one and same. So I am Lord Shiva as well. Shivoham. You too are Lord Shiva. Shivotvam. Thus, I pay my salutations to you. As far as SB is concerned, it contradicts Mahabharata and Rig Veda in many places and since Mahabharata itself declares that it has been gleaned from Vedas and all Puranas are supposed to be dependent on Mahabharata, SB, as a Purana must also follow the same trend. But it doesn’t. You are talking of quantum mechanics in SB. But the root concepts of SB, like hell, heaven, God residing in paradise, spiritual sky etc are unscientific. In one hand, it extols Lord Shiva as Supreme and then again it maligns him by calling him inferior to Krishna. So how can you expect me to accept SB as a authentic script? Now if you are thinking of applying “Antaryamin of Parvati Pati”concept here, then please don’t. I have already refuted the argument sent by you as hoax by quoting few verses from Satapatha Brahmana and also proved that Lord Shiva cannot have an “Antaryamin” as he is unborn. His appearence from Brahma’s forehead is only symbolic, and the names “given” by Brahma are his own names, not lord Vishnu’s. I hope you too remember the song he sang and through, which he said to all, Bhaj Govindam Bhaj Govindam Bhaj Govindam “MUDH mate” (Worship Govinda, oh foolish Vaishnavas, for your grammatical jugglery and maligning Lord Shiva won’t save you at the time of death).

                Even I would not have been so hard hitting had you known where your place is. So sir, kindly worship Sri Rama Chandra, and learn that there is no difference between Hari and Hara. It’s an earnest request.
                Yours faithfully,
                Nilalohita

                Like

          • owner of this page , bhagavatha is bogus i can prove it , why claim it as essence of Vedas , vedas are shruthis where are bhagavatha is a purana , smrithi , bogus story of later period

            Like

        • Miss Nilalohita

          I hope you would some day back your statements with some solid arguments. Your understanding of Vedas is as incorrect as incorrect can be. Vedas no where laud Lord Shiva, Parvati Pati as Supreme Personality of GodHead. I have already written about it in length answering all your misconception emanating from very very poor knowledge of Sanskrit Language at the end of this web page. Your interpretation of the verses is laughable.

          You don’t even have basic knowledge of Sanskrit it’s clear. You don’t even have your preliminary basics of Sanskrit grammar in place. Pls stop this cheap habit of passing comments for foolery on such serious topics. I am sure there is ample space on internet for you to behave in that manner. Here you should only concern your self with serious discussion on the topic with an honest intention to learn.

          Kind regards

          Rishi

          Like

          • Bahut hasi a rahi hai, kyu? Well first of all congrats, you are the 76th person who sent me the same content, copied and pasted from a bogus blog.

            Like

          • Dear Sir,
            Words one spoken, cannot be taken back, like an arrow shot from a bow doesn’t returns. Thanks for the concern you showed for me regarding my interpretation of Vedas. I am grateful for that. But I know what I know and I also know what you know. But you don’t know what you know, then how come you’ll know what I know?

            Vedas do laud Lord Shiva, Parvati Pati as Supreme Personality of Godhead, and also that him and Vishnu are one and same. I too have already written about it in length answering all your misconception emanating from copying and pasting without deeper analysis of a long time and from misconception that Sanskrit Language can be known simply by reading an article from any bogus blog. Even though you find my interpretation of the verses laughable, I don’t think laughing at the poor iq of the admin of the blog you copied this content from will do any good to me, him or you. Instead it will tint my soul with sin of making fun of another person, who is misguided to believe in daydreams.

            Like

            • seriously, first learn sanskrit properly and then learn to connect the dots absolutely. Vedas praise all Gods and at the end says they are nothing but ‘visne’…they praise ‘shiva’ to say in the last that he is divine too considering he is also a form of hari. In those times they don’t know that bringing essence of shiva of hari leads to think shiva is the supreme. Lack of understanding causes diff, interpretations.

              Like

      • But Who will decide which puran is superior.
        All purans have same storys. but When you tell bhagwat there is difference it clear shows it is completely edited and not the real one.

        Like

        • bhagawat is considered as the best among Puranas till then by vyasa himself. if it is interpolated, it must have been done in bad way like manu smriti effected by missionaries. shiva purana and shakti purana came due to lack of proper understanding and they are not authentic. they are just alternative ideas by certain..which made all this…from vishnu supreme soul or source of energy came the most anger part of him, shiva with almost same power…so both are same in that sense…but not in the intellect..hari is way more superior and they themselves are in maya and play of him, what about our tiny little souls who are in, low scale?

          Like

    • Emilio wang… Vishnu is way beyond universal anything. He is the consciousness on whom lord shiva meditates. As for understanding this its clearly not possible for you in this life time… Where ever you are from pls stop usage of a language, which immediately reflects upon your upbringing and whether you even are fit to enter and discuss such issues. Your statement “Go have a read on monism iskcon dudes”? First your idea of monism no one but only you have read. Shiva Tatva is not monism and has nothing to do with it but that you clearly have not understood. This is not west where stupidity even at the cost of truth is appreciated under the pretext of freedom of expression and lauded upon. You do have the right to express but foolishness, stupidity, little knowledge… etc is if where your expression stem from, would only be acknowledged with disgust, scorn, indifference… etc. Now who ever you are and what ever sickens you one thing is clear, it’s not body else but your own ignorance, which results in your dwelling in such a pathetic state. As for what Shiva Sutra says you have not even understood how to approach in order to gain true knowledge… What makes you think a fool like you could give commentary on Shiva Sutra…

      Like

  3. It is so piteous that some use vile languages to express themselves.This is how violence and religious wars stem… On so many forums muslims are hating christians are hating hindus… hate is everywhere even amongst the sects within each religion… very sad. Iskcon is not trying to divide Gods but trying to teach, not only ignorant people with great egos, but anyone who wishes to truly understand and feel God, that the original source of everything is One Beautiful Supreme All Attractive Being… the Original Personality of Godhead since time immemorial as stated by Himself in Bhagavad Gita (song of God) as the Cause of All Causes. People are so brainwashed and conditioned into religious beliefs they cannot understand what SPIRITUAL means any more. God: there is only one, and He has unlimited expansions in unlimited qualities for whatever unlimited reasons. We are also expansions of God but we are not God… God the original is the knower of everything and above the material without a material body… this does not mean that God is incomplete and scattered everywhere. God has a spiritual body and is an all pervading immortal atman complete yet omnipresent… that is also what great meas. .. we cannot understand these things with limited minds and vision. We, as humans should be striving to become perfect which is through practice- what is perfection other than pure love of God with indiscriminate love to all Gods manifestations, which includes anything that lives. We can only get there through a bona fide guru and practice of Bhakti. To serve God is to serve His pure devotees and God in turn serves His devotees. We can understand this by asking ourselves a simple question, how long are we prepared to tolerate people who want from us all the time and never once consider giving back? Selfish people offer worship ritualistically for material satisfaction and God is merciful and grants in the appropriate forms, but unselfish people offer love and service to others without considering themselves and this is far higher than any material request. A person who can grow such qualities is always far more dear and worthy of spiritual reciprocation… they do not raise their voices in anger, they are always humble and they can endure trials and tribulations… how many of us really have such qualities and qualify for Gods home? Instead people are shouting ignorantly my religion and my God is better, anything else is nonsense… this is the sad state of blind ignorance with no understanding for God. People should rather pray for intelligence and love and start to heal themselves from ignorance and ego for there to be any kind of positive change.

    Like

  4. When idiots have their own knowledge gotten from some stupid source and when even the most bonafide proof presented before them fails to make them see their foolishness. When foolishness keeps a person from seeing the truth, one must immediately understand that such idiots are born doomed and nothing can ever help them. When scoundrels cannot even listen to what God himself said ( Gita ) such low lives are best left to their puny brains to be born, live and die in its created conjunctures.

    Like

    • No. Krishna is the Supreme Lord and Lord Shiva is His greatest devotee. Vaisnavanam yatha Shambu. Just as the Ganges is the best among rivers, Shambhu, or Lord Shiva is best among the vaisnavas (devotees of Krishna). This is the verdict of the Srimad Bhagavatam.

      Niraj Bidawatka

      Like

        • vishnu is killer of shiva devotees ravan, hiranyakashyap, hiranyaksha, banasura, jarasanda, all these demons are shiva devotees but lord vishnu killed all these demons in his avtars vishnu killed so many shiva devotees in his avtars but your shiva never killed single vishnu devotees hahaha jarasanda is siva devotee bhima is vishnu devotee bhima killed jarasanda your shiva failed to save his devotees so only lord vishnu is supreme god

          Like

          • I take away all his riches.” That’s all. Then when he becomes helpless, he becomes firmly convinced and when he has no other shelter, then automatically he takes shelter of Krishna. This is what Krishna demands, sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekam [Bg. 18.66].

            But u are foolish peoples worshiping lord vishnu…

            Like

  5. DEAR WRITER OF THIS ARTICLE,

    Please get your facts right. Probably, you have misunderstood the Gita. The Lord has made comparisons to several demigods and deities in the scripture. He says – “Amongst the warriors, I am Karthikeya.” And goes on comparing himself with Garuda… and many others. Lord Shiva is the Supreme Soul – Mahadev. How could you say he is a demigod, my friend? Vishnu himself meditates upon Shiva and vice-versa. Please stay away from wrong comparisons. Your blog is misleading.

    Like

    • Dear Ms. Resham,

      Krishna has categorically stated in the Bhagavad Gita that He is the origin of all the demigods (aham adir hi devanam). This is mentioned in the second verse of the 10th chapter of the Gita.

      You have cited verse no.25 of the 10th chapter, wherein Krishna says that “amongst the warriors I am Kartikeya”. But you have not paid attention to what Krishna says further in the same verse – ” Of all the water-bodies, I am the ocean” So does it mean that the Ocean is God and that there is no difference between Krishna and the ocean?

      In fact when Krishna says that “among the warriors – I am Kartikeya, , among trees – I am the Banyan tree, etc.”, He cites the best amongst a class of persons and/or objects and goes on to state that He (Krishna) is the source of that opulence. Krishna is the source of Kartikeya’s quality of martial excellence. He further sums it up in verse 41 of the 10th chapter that whatever opulent and beautiful things that one sees in this world are an emanation from Him.

      You have claimed that Lord Shiva is the Supreme. But that is nowhere mentioned in the Bhagavad Gita. Nor is it mentioned anywhere in the Bhagavad Gita that Lord Vishnu meditates on Lord Shiva.

      But one thing that you mention is correct. You have said that Shiva meditates on Lord Vishnu. That is correct and it is mentioned in the Srimad Bhagavatam (Canto 4, chap 3, verse 23)

      So in fact it is you who have got most of your facts wrong.

      We have got our facts right because we have got them directly from the Bhagavad Gita, as it was mentioned by Krishna Himself, without any interpretations.

      We suggest that you should follow our blog to get the right facts. The aim of this blog is to bring back all the misled people on the right path by distributing true knowledge.

      Thanks. Hare Krishna.
      Niraj Bidawatka

      Like

      • Mr Niraj ji
        Stop spreading rumors about devotee of Krishna n Shiva that only lord Krishna’s devotee only get wins n lord Shiva’s devotee never wins by saying this you are making fight between the devotees of lord Krishna n lord Shiva which is not totally right you taking Krishna devotion perfect which is the best gift for us by my friend please let people themselves decided on whom they want to devote forever whether it is lord Krishna n lord Shiva
        But it is not v decide that on whom v want to meditate it is the lord who decide that in his which form who wants to worship….
        Hare Krishna va Jagdishwaram Shiva

        Like

        • Dear Mr. Tejas Mishra,

          Lord Krishna has specifically said in the Bhagavatam, “When I favour someone, the first thing that I do is, I take away his wealth. In such a distraught state, all his friends and relatives desert him, and when he is left alone, he remains with no choice but to make speedy progress on the path back home, back to Godhead.”. [yasyaham anugrhnami tad dhanam harisye sanaih – SB 10.88.8]

          So whatever we are saying is based on shastra – nothing is concoted. There are so many differences in so many things of this variegated world and similarly there is a difference between the devotees of Krishna and the devotees of Shiva. So don’t hesitate to accept the differences and don’t be so blindly rigid.

          The demons generally become the devotees of Lord Shiva because he is very easy to please and very quickly bestows material benedictions. Whereas Krishna is not so easily pleased and neither does Krishna award material prosperity. Since Shiva becomes easily pleased, he is known as Ashutosh. So most of devotees of Lord Shiva are demons and after taking benedictions from Shiva, his demon-devotees want to kill him. I hope you know the tale of Bhasmasura, who wanted to kill Lord Shiva after taking benedictions from him. It was Krishna who saved Lord Shiva from the hands of the demon “devotee”.

          So there is a difference between the devotees of Shiva and Krishna. If you simply close your eyes and wish to ignore the differences, then you are just like the proverbial cat who closes its eyes when it sees death approaching.

          I can only hope that good sense prevails upon you.

          Hare Krishna.

          Yours in the service of Krishna,

          Niraj Bidawatka (Editor, The Hare Krishna Revolution)

          Like

    • shiva devotees are demons ravan is shiva devotee vishnu avtar ram killed ravan, hiranyakashyap is shiva devotee narasimha killed hiranyakashyap, hiranyaksha is shiva devotee varaha killed hiranyaksha, jarasanda is shiva devotee bhima is vishnu devotee bhima killed jarasanda your shiva failed to save his devotee hahaha tirupathi is world richest vishnu temple even his temple is more powerful than other gods so only lord vishnu is supreme god

      Like

    • Shiva meditates on Vishnu…Shiva is almost equal energy of Vishnu/Krishna who need to cool down always…Vishnu meditates deeply or closes his eyes so that this universe runs with all these energies creating masses, bonds, reactions, illusion, so that you can type, i can reply, so that machines can run, etc.

      Like

  6. VERY WELL… DEAR KRISHNA…..
    I’M THE SHIVA AND THE KRISHNA….
    U CAN’T GET CHEESE WITHOUT MILK…. THATS ONLY SHIVA…. WHO IS WITHOUT ALL QUALITY(NIRGUNA), AND THE KRISHNA ALSO WITHOUT QUALITY(NIRGUNA) BUT SOMETIMES WITH QUALITY(SAGUNA).
    YOU HAVE TRUST OF THE LORD NAME “KRISHNA” THAT’S WHY YOU WANT ONLY TO MAKE HIM SUPREME… NOTHING ELSE THERE U WILL FIND WHERE U PUT KRISHNA FIRST AND THE SHIVA SECOND…

    NO MATTER U ALSO SHIVA …BECAUSE OUR JOURNEY ENDS WHERE SHIVA BEGINS NOTHING ELSE…GOOD DAY KRISHNA BABY…! 😀

    Like

    • Ansh good you said Krishna is nirguna and saguna but if Shiva was just nirguna how come you describe his form or be called Parvati Pati or Rudram or the destroyer of Daksha yagna or the one with matted hair or the one who supports crescent moon on his head? Your theory is so stupid that it simply can make even babies laugh at you.

      its said wisdom comes with age in your case age has come alone it seems hahahahahahahahahahaha. Krishna is beyond saguna and nirguna. All this concept of saguna and nirguna is only an amsa or a spark of Krishna’s splendour.

      Do laugh at a child Ansh because a child too gives birth to a mother and I hope you would have heard this adage that “Child is the father of Man”… just that its usage included intelligent and wise men… sorry thats a sad news for you coz it precludes you… LOL!!

      Like

      • Everytime I see any message from you and your dear Narayanastra authors, it just spoils my mood. That’s why I stopped talking to you two. Don’t you understand or are you so dumb that you cannot understand that I AM NOT INTERESTED TO TALK TO YOU? But still you keep on messaging me everytime I have a conversation with Sarva nama kevala Hari nama. I enabled moderation to prevent Narayanastra from messaging me and if there was any way I can stop you as well, I would have gone for it. First you insulted me and now you are questioning my loyalty towards my country! How dare you? You have no right to speak to me when I don’t want to. And yes, tell your friend to mind his own business and stay away from me. This applies to you as well. Whatever I and Sarva nama kevala Hari nama are talking about is our personal matter. Don’t interfere in it. And take it as a request, threat, warning or an order, whatever you like, stop messaging me. I don’t give any damn importance to you and your mate and am NOT interested to talk to you. So kindly don’t reply me back and leave me alone.

        Like

    • shiva devotees are demons ravan is shiva devotee vishnu avtar ram killed ravan, hiranyakashyap is shiva devotee narasimha killed hiranyakashyap, hiranyaksha is shiva devotee varaha killed hiranyaksha, jarasanda is shiva devotee bhima is vishnu devotee bhima killed jarasanda your shiva failed to save his devotee hahaha tirupathi is world richest vishnu temple even his temple is more powerful than other gods so only lord vishnu is supreme god

      Like

      • Vijay don’t bad mouth Lord Shiva. You will only hurt Krishna. Lord Shiva is the biggest Krishna devotee. He is most dear to him. To bad mouth Lord Shiva Is hurt Krishna himself. If you love Krishna be very loving and respectful towards Lord Shiva he is the greatest Krishna bhakti and his blessing only can help you get near Krishna.

        Like

  7. Stop spreading rumors about lord Krishna devotee n lord Shiva that lord Shiva’s devotee never get moksha n only get material boons n only lord Krishna’s devotee get moksha…. Which is not right n this lord Krishna never said like this about the difference between his n lord Shiva’s devotee which you people are making a fight between devotee of Krishna n Shiva
    You are the devotees of Krishna by saying all this yo people are making lord Krishna himself hurteed n you do not have any right to say such things which is not totally right n just a fake statement of yours
    In any of his speech lord Krishna never said that his devotee n lord Shiva devotee are different so stop spreading such rumours about such things

    Like

    • shiva devotees are demons ravan is shiva devotee ram killed ravan, hiranyakashayap is shiva devotee narasimha killed hiranyakashayp, hiranyaksha is shiva devotee varaha killed hiranyaksha, kumbhakarna is shiva devotee rama killed kumbhakarna our lord vishnu killed so many shiva devotees in his avatars but your shiva never killed single vishnu devotees jarasanda is shiva devotee bhima is vishnu devotee bhima killed jarasanda thirupathi is world richest vishnu temple even his temple is more powerful than other gods so only lord vishnu is supreme god

      Like

  8. Krishna has told in bhagavadgeetha that he is only the Master and He is only the Devotee . This all should learn. As Krishna is above all out thoughts we cannot know his leela. Truth is only 1 and always will be one. That is Bhagavgeetha. Nothing else. Nowadays in serials Devo ke dev Mahadev, All stories are created by themselves. Majority of them. Mahabharath by B.R Chopra is the Best. Even a single scene or script is not fake.

    Like

    • The Original Bhagvat Gita was written by great Vedvyasa not by prabhupada
      Prabhupad written books which is only spread everywhere by iskcon people only n they only read only his written books n considering Other great Tulsidasji written books fake because it doesnt match wit there books , iskcon people only create fight between lord Krishna n lord shiva devotee by saying that one is supreme n not the another by these they earn money by even selling there fake written books one but the truth is they are not the real devotees of lord Krishna because lord Krishna devotee only spread the bhakti of lord, not making one supreme n making fight between lord Krishna n lord shiva devotee by saying these wrong rumours but instead of chanting the name of lord Krishna n lord shiva iskcon people who are hare Krishna revolution devotee only wants us to fight instead of chanting the name o

      Like

    • Guys don’t worry Tejas Misra has the proverbial birds brain… Wasting time with him trying to explain him about the esoteric knowledge of holy scripture is like trying to sing before a buffalo… Tejas Misra… Is an illiterate idiot… Suffering from learning disability. Let’s just pray to the all mighty God to bless him so his limitations come to an end and he can begin to know and understand the a Truth.

      Like

        • Dear Nilalohita

          Krishna is God.

          Not just according to me but also according to the Bhagavad Gita and according to great saints such as Narada, Asita, Devala and Vyas.

          All the Authorities accept Krishna as God.

          Hare Krishna.
          Yours faithfully,
          Niraj Bidawatka

          Like

          • Yes, so he is. But who told you that Lord Shiva is inferior? Well, your answers regarding Lord Shiva was something typical that I have been listening Gaudiya Vaishnavas cite. But I am afraid that if I start quoting Vedas regarding Lord Shiva’s supremacy and how SB is a bogus script, you wouldn’t be able to digest it. Sri Ram jai Ram jai jai Ram.

            Like

            • You are quite right I would not be able to digest. SB is a bogus script… Well Adi guru Shankracharya ( full incarnation of Auspicious Lord Shiva ) used to do dandwat before SB. And said this is the unabridged, the purest & supreme truth. He said he does not has the capacity to give a commentary over it. It’s his recorded statement. Existence of SB has been for the oldest manuscript discovered yet is approx 4000yrs old. It has been proven to be accurate by today’s scientists. Dwaraka the lost city, which was swallowed by the sea 5000 yrs ago after Lord Krishna’s departure; a team of scientist consisting of marine biologist, archaeologists, historians, sanskritist, from Harvard university, Cambridge and Oxford university, 3 of the top European university, along with indian scientists, marine biologists, historians and sanskritists, found Dwaraka under the sea by the side of modern Dwaraka in gujrat, which is of the size of Manhattan ( yet the discovery continues ) and is exactly the city as described in SB… Quantum mechanics and physics today is being researched from SB by not 1 but 3 Nobel laureates. The time span on universe and other time lines which have been mentioned in SB in nearest to the modern day calculations unlike any old holy scripture of the world. Never before in all my interactions has there been ever a question raised on the veracity of SB. No Hindu worth his salt has ever Questioned it leave alone calling it bogus.

              Nilalohita now let me ask you, which Vedas have you referred to which says anything except that Krishna / Vishnu is supreme of all. Please let me know. Let’s see whether you can get me a quote from any of the of the four Vedas, which explicitly states that Shiva is more supreme or equal to Vishnu. Where as I will give you quotes stating clearly lord Vishnu is above lord Shiva. Just don’t come here talk foolishly eat our head. If you have any seriousness then talk on firm knowledge of scriptures or hold your peace for the rest of your life.

              To Q SB is to Q Sanatan Dharma itself. Just think before you talk.

              Like

            • Veda Vyasa wrote both Vedas and Srimath Bhaagavatham. In Vedas, you’ll find visno parama padam many times. Everything is a play by Him. Narada says even the greatest devotee, who know him, can’t understand his every action. Even demi gods, Lord Brahma, Lord Shiva can’t say His intention behind his thoughts and actions, so what about you? Lord Vishnu’s anger caused Lord Shiva form. But he didn’t make Shiva know it. He says both are equal and if you pray Shiva, you pray Me. There are different inner meanings to His actions and words. He plays all this and acts too. He is beyond every cause.

              Like

            • Miss Nilalohita. Read Vedas again completely till the end and then you’ll find it. Yes, Rudra, Siva are used many times and at the end you’ll find they are the names of Vishnu. There Siva/Rudra are used in the context of Vishnu. Just like they say they are same everytime to praise Vishnu they repeated Siva. SB is bogus? Vedas that you say are genuine and SB you say Bogus is from the same author. Siva is His energy which He released for the first time, His anger form. Almost equal in energy but not in intellect.

              Like

      • Mr rishi Kishore
        Tel me one thing is this what lord Krishna taught you to say such things about anyone or me that m a idiot suffering from learning disability even m n idiot
        By saying such cheap things you yourself has proof that you are nothing but just n illiterate person who doesn’t have manner’s to tak with the devotees of lord or with anyone n ha only you can say on post n al because even you know what kind of cheap person are you who doesn’t have manners to talk with anyone n what did you said that m havin a proverbrial birds brains n to explain with me is to explain me is to sing before a buffalo is this what lord Krishna told you to say such things to anyone aree what you vl say m saying that you are not a pure devotee of lord Krishna not because you said such things to me but because of you never understand what lord Krishna wants us to see, i feel pity on you n ha if you really have guts by saying truth about lord then m giving my no 9920498389 to you for showing the truth rather then saying such fake things about lord Krishna n lord Shiva that they both are not same so that there devotee’s should fight with each other for there God supremacy which is totally not right n by doing such things you people Are increasing your business that’s it may The supreme lord Krishna n lord Shiva give you there mercy so that you won’t make fight between devotee of lord like a terrorist organization
        Hare Krishna

        Like

        • Mr Tejas Misra

          The Supreme Lord Krishna’s & his most beloved devotee Lord Shiva’s blessing would be most fortunate for me so I ask you, in-fact plead you to pray in all honesty, sincerity, perseverance & resolve so that they shower me with their mercy all the time.

          As for fights it only exists because there is misunderstanding, which stems out of one’s incomplete or little knowledge. To have spiritual discourse in the form of exchange of thoughts is one of the bonafide ways described in shastras to help people gain true knowledge, which is to know about the Supreme Personality Of GodHead Krishna… there is a term for it too Mr Misra and its called “Shastrarth”.

          As for calling you a fool, an illiterate, a person with learning disability etc, is because you have in all your posts up till now have only shown such qualities about yourself. Calling a fool a fool sometimes is pertinent because unless he understands that he is so, how can he improve?

          As for you calling me illiterate, I thank you for saying so for I am fully aware of the fact that there is so much I have to learn about the Vedas and our other holy scriptures that it makes me feel like an illiterate. I certainly don’t take this as an offence but in-fact its the truth.

          As for manners my comment was strictly on your state of knowledge but your attacks have been personal. It reflects very poorly upon your manners and character. Such a disgusting and melancholic outburst where you have had the audacity of using Lord Krishna’s name for advancement of your pathetic purpose, reflects upon your upbringing.

          I called you an idiot and a fool but I wasn’t firm enough with you. You are a rascal and you use words like fake, insinuate motives only to assuage your dogmatic beliefs, which have no support of any of our Vedic / sanskrit holy scripture but your disgusting foolery.

          Just so that you know Iskcon is not where I do my business as you have tried to hint. You have given your mobile number but I wouldn’t give you mine. What I would do is I shall wait for you day after tomorrow in the business lounge of J.W. Marriot Juhu exactly at 5:00 pm. No I am not doing it specially for you. I dont have that time and neither am I that lame. I have my business meeting there, which will be over by 5:00 pm. Kindly confirm on this site that you would be there latest by tomorrow. As for communicating with you once you are there I have your number
          as you enter the lobby and give my name to the hotel front desk they will bring you to me. I shall instruct them accordingly. You talk about guts on the phone Mr Misra well here it is forget phone lets meet face to face.

          Like

          • Mr rishi let me tell you one thing very well by your written statements about me in A smartly way n so as in a very determined way you have mentioned me wrong n yourself correctly so let me tel yo one thing that first have called me by such cheap words which i dint n as far as i m concerned about Vedas let me tel you that just as you said that you know the full Vedas itself which automatically show’s that you yourself had the self ego for it n nothing else n as far as every one knows that no one knows the God completely except he himself, so rather wasting time with you is to sing before a buffalo as you said in your previous mail so even if you deny this by saving yourself in a smartly way it’s okie n one more thing i dint said that iskcon people are wrong but by making difference between lord Krishna n lord Shiva they are hurting lord Krishna himself which is clearly stated in the book of Ramacharitmanas by Tulsidasji book that the one who makes difference between lord Krishna n lord Shiva that person will never get moksha so rather than making fights between the devotees of Krishna n Shiva by proving one supreme n not another’s which is a great offense please chant the name of Krishna with the perfect devotion but not by making differences then automatically you vl come to know n please stop saying that you have a busy time so that you can’t talk to me on the phone which shows that you have a self ego a lot by calling me to meet but not asking the person when he is free itl automatically shows that you are thinking only for yourself which is a selfish quality of yours on more thing that you said about face to face is right you think yourself smart rather than others please take out this from your ego mind otherwise it vl destroy you

            Like

            • Mr. Tejas Mishra,

              It appears that you do not have a proper understanding of the English language. Mr. Rishi has gracefully accepted your accusation that he is illiterate by admitting that there is so much to be learnt from the Vedas and therefore he is indeed an illiterate.

              But in your reply to Mr. Rishi, you say that that he is an egoistic person because he claims that he knows fully about the Vedas. Whereas, Mr. Rishi does not make any such claims. In fact, he admits that there is so much to be learnt from the Vedas. Thus your understanding of the English language is not proper.

              Do not argue sentimentally. You are simply harping on a few cliched statements such as, “Do not create fights among devotees of Krishna and Shiva”, “You are hurting Krishna by making difference between Krishna and Shiva”, etc. etc.

              Since you do not have any scriptural backing, you want to evade meeting Mr. Rishi. You are simply putting forward Tulsidasji’s Ram Charitmanas, which is considered an unauthorized scripture. Valmiki Ramayan is authentic and nowhere has the reverred Valmiki spoken about the equality of Krishna and Shiva.

              So have some spine and meet Mr. Rishi at the designated time and venue. Take some time out to meet him.

              If others such as Mr. Rishi are egoistic, arrogant and selfish, you should set an example by being egoless, submissive and selfless.

              I therefore suggest that once you yourself exhibit such qualities, you should have no problems in meeting him on Monday at 5 pm at the J.W. Marriot, Juhu, Mumbai. By meeting him personally, you can save such an egoistic person from destruction.

              Hare Krishna.
              Yours in the service of Krishna,
              Niraj Bidawatka, Editor

              Like

  9. You are right “OM NAMO BHAGAVATE RUDRAYA” (Yajurveda, Taitiriya Aranyaka, Sri Rudram, Anuvaka 1) Bhagavate or bhagavan is to be used only for “Supreme Personality Of God Head”. Miss Nilalohita, Pls promise to agree that instead of stupidity, rational exchange of thoughts in form of argument and counter argument based on scripture and supporting facts / proofs shall take place between us (only as simultaneously replying to many would lessen the motive of my entering this exchange of our knowledge) and you will not run away but either agree with dignity that you have lost or have failed in proving your point to satisfaction since you lack knowledge. Either of it and vice- versa as acceptance is to be understood ok. The problem with people is that they start a topic, cannot sustain it and simply run away and while doing so behave in a manner, which says that it wasn’t right to discuss such issues with such a gentleman or lady. Ok so here we go. First my simple question to you is please state whether you have ever studied Sanskrit if yes till what grade. If not, have you pursued it in personal capacity so as you could acquire its knowledge. Do explain why your translation of the verses quoted by you is so poor that it puts a normal standard 10th student of Sanskrit to utter shame? INTRODUCTION SrI: SrimathE rAmAnujAya namaha. Srimath varavaramunayE namaha. Sri Rudram is a portion of the yajur vedam that consists of 11 anuvAkAs. It is also known as Satarudriyam, Rudraprashnam, RudrOpanishad. At a superficial glance, it appears to be directed to Parvati pati Rudran. Indeed, the Satarudriyam Mantras are chanted to pArvati pati in the mahAbhArata. It should be noted that according to SrI BhAshyam, VedaVyAsar has rejected the Pashupata Matham (Shaiva, Kapalika, Kalamukha and Pasupata sects) in the Brahma Sutras not only for the wrong philosophical tenets (considering Isvaran as nimitta kAranam only and prakrti as upAdAna kAranam), but also because of the inappropriateness of their upAsaNam vis a vis vedAntA, with respect to the deity they invoke (Shiva) and the practices (smearing ashes over body; wearing rudrAkshA) as well. So, while pArvati pati may be the devatA for this prashnam, it is inferred from the undeniable birth of rudra as declared in the mahOpanishad and satapatha brahmana that the Rudram addresses the indweller of this devatA, namely, sriman nArAyaNan, who goes by the names invoked in the prashnam. It is also explained by Krishna in the Santi parvam of the mahAbhArata that by worshipping mahEshwarA (pArvati pati), He (Krishna) was worshipping the nArAyaNa in mahEshwarA (ie, the antaryAmin, Himself). Although all the 11 anuvAkAs are meaningful, I will only take the first anuvAkA into consideration. This is because an explanation of this anuvAkA, in my opinion, would be adequate to understand other anuvAkAs, which address the deity by many names. The 1st anuvAkA is a wonderful stuti of the kalyAnagunams of the parabrahman revealed luminously by the Upanishads (srutisirasE vidiptE brahmani srinivAsE). The Rudram has been commentated upon by the likes of SayanAchAryar and Bhatta Bhaskarar, who are not Vishishtadvaitins. As far as our achAryAs are concerned, SrI ranga rAmAnuja muni has commented on those mantras of Rudram that are repeated in the svetAsvatArA Upanishad, but has not provided a complete vyAkhyAnam. However, the gist of Rudram is clearly brought out in those 2 mantras itself. Furthermore, the Rudram does find indirect references in works such as tattva traya bhAshyam and rahasya traya sAram of srI varavaramuni and srI vedAnta desikan respectively. This write up will be based on these sources. This write-up is just to highlight that the upAsya mUrthy of Rudram is none other than SrI lakshmi nArAyaNan. SrI Rudram is chanted during pavitrOtsavam and vasanthOtsavam in Vishnu temples. Before looking at SrI Rudram, it is important to bear in mind the intent of the vedA, which is to proclaim the supremacy of sriman nArAyaNan. So, my next post in this write up will focus on the following: 1) Explain the supremacy of Sriman nArAyaNan. 2) Explain the position of devAs with respect to sriman nArAyaNan. 3) Explain the position of certain key acharyas of other sampradAyams. 4) Touch on the frustration of Appayya Dikshitar in his unsuccessful attempts to prove supremacy of rudran. With this background, I believe a study of the Rudram will be a lot easier. PRELUDE – NARAYANA PARATHVAM The vedA is divided into karma khAndam and jnAna khandam. The karma khAndam describes the various rituals and actions that are addressed to Brahman, whereas the jnAna khAndam describes the nature of this Brahman. Of course, the karma khAndam also contains certain clarifying statements (ekam sath…;tad visnoh paramam padam), but these could be misinterpreted without a knowledge of the Upanishads. For instance, `Vishnu’ means `all-pervading’, so the above statement referring to paramapadam could be interpreted as the abode of a being to which pervasiveness is attributed to, rather than nArAyaNan in particular. Here, we shall see how all 3 vaidika matha sthApanAchAryas have shown Vishnu is the Parabrahman of the Veda. Sri Ramanuja’s Method Bhagavad rAmAnujar points out that the Upanishads variously describe the cause of the universe as Sath, AtmA and Brahman. In the mahOpanishad, a more specific description of this Cause is mentioned as follows, “Eko ha vai nArAyaNa asIt, na brahma, nEshana…”. “Only nArAyaNa existed prior to creation. There was no Brahma, no Shiva (Ishana), no stars, moon, etc….” Here, the cause of the Universe, which had been described as Sath, AtmA, Brahman elsewhere is now termed `nArAyaNa’. Furthermore, devas like Brahma and Rudra are clearly mentioned to be subject to pralaya. According to Panini’s AshtadhyAyi (8.4.3), the `Na-kaaram’ makes the word `nArAyaNa’ a proper noun. The vedas invariably use the `nArAyaNa’ term (rolling the tongue for `na-kAram’) as opposed to `nArAyana’. As is well known, proper nouns are specific terms and hence, nArAyaNa is a specific term that denotes the supreme reality. In contrast, Sath, AtmA, Brahman, etc could even denote jivAtmA or prakrti (Prakrti is called `brahman’ on account of its greatness as well). There is a rule known as chAga pashu nyAyA, those general terms (common nouns like sat, atma, brahman) occurring in the same context as a specific term (proper noun like nArAyaNa) would make these general terms connote the specific term. For example, shruti says, ‘sacrifice an animal (paShu) at one point and then later on says, ‘sacrifice a goat’. Since the sacrifice in both contexts is the same, it is correct to interpret ‘paShu’ in the first vAkya as referring to the goat only. The same logic is applied here. The context for Sath, AtmA, Brahman, etc in various shruti vAkyAs is Universal causality. The same is the context for eko ha vai nArAyaNa asIt in the mahOpanishad. Hence, nArAyaNa is the cause of the Universe as denoted by Sath, AtmA, Brahman and other names. Furthermore, the meanings of the name ‘nArAyaNa’ are well-known as indicative of the qualities of parabrahman. Thus, the proper noun, meanings of the name and the context makes nArAyaNa the identity of parabrahman. nArAyaNa param brahma: tattvam nArAyaNa para: says the nArAyaNa suktam. The mahOpanishad states that nArAyaNa alone existed before creation and specifically rules out Brahma, Rudra, etc. The nArAyaNopanishad, quoted by srI parAsara bhattar, srI lOkAchAryar and srI vedAnta desikan, states that Brahma, Rudra and Indra were born from nArAyaNa (nArAyaNaT brahma jAyatE, nArAyaNat rudrO jAyatE, nArAyaNat indrO jAyatE). In addition, the satapatha brahmaNa clearly declares that a boy was born to Brahma and started crying. Upon enquiry, the boy replied that he was ‘anapahatapApmA’, ie, not cleansed of karma and that he wanted auspicious names. Brahma then gave him the names of Rudra, Isana, Mahadeva, Pashupati, etc to cleanse his karma (Ref: Sathapatha brAhmaNa – 6.1.3.9). Whereas, nArAyaNa is declared to be apahatapApma in subAlopanishad. This indicates that names like mahAdevA, Isana, etc were existent before the birth of pArvati pati and applied to parabrahman, who is identified with nArAyaNa as above. The Satapatha Brahmana (6.1.3.9) explicitly recommends naming children with such auspicious names after citing the incident of Rudra’s birth as ‘anapahatapApma’ and his naming. Thus, these names belong to nArAyaNa. Hence, nArAyaNa is differentiated from the other devas. As they are subject to birth and were absent before creation, it follows that they are jivAtmAs who have been assigned different posts. The subalOpanishad, an authentic upanishad for which SrutaprakAsikAchAryar wrote a commentary, attests that nArAyaNa is without karma (esha sarva-bhUtAntarAtmA apahatapApmA divyo deva: eko nArAyaNa🙂 Who is this nArAyaNa then? He is identified as the husband of SrI, Bhu and nilA devi in the purusha suktam (Hrisca te Lakshmisca patnyou). Here, `HrI’ is an epithet of Bhu Devi, Lakshmi denotes Sri Devi and the second `ca’ after Lakshmi denotes the hidden patni, nilA devi (the existence of nilA devi is accepted by Appayya Dikshitar in his yAdavAdbhyudaya vyAkhyAnam as well; he quotes the Harivamsha for pramAnam for the third pathni). He is the being in the Sun with the lotus eyes (tasya yathA kapyAsa pundarIkam evam akshinI) and a moustache. He has a bluish-black complexion (nIlatoyadamadyasta…) and a golden hue due to Lakshmi’s divya tejas spreading from his chest over his body (aditya varnam). He, who is unborn, takes innumerable avatArams (ajAyamAno bahudA vijAyatE). He is identified with Vishnu in the Vishnu GAyatrI: “Om nArAyaNaya vidmahE, vAsudevAya dimahi, tanno vishnu prachOdayat”. It should be noted that the gAyatri mantras for other devatas start with `tatpurushAya vidmahE’, whereas the one for Vishnu starts with `nArAyaNa’, which is the proper noun denoting the parabrahman. For instance, Parvati Pati Rudran’s gAyatri is `tatpurushAya vidmahE mahAdevAya dimahi, tanno rudra prachOdayAt’. The gAyatri for GarudA is `tatpurushAya vidmahE suvarnapakshAya dimahi, tanno garuda prachOdayAt’. It is only for Vishnu that `nArAyaNa’ is mentioned in the gAyatri. Thus, the equation of the supreme reality nArAyaNa with Vishnu is established. They are not two different beings, but the one and same. But there are other sentences like `Siva eva kevalam’ (Only Siva existed before creation) and `Eko vai rudrO’, etc seeming to attribute paratvam to other devatas. This is reconciled in two ways: 1) Firstly, terms like `Rudra’, `Siva’, `Indra’, `Agni’, `Hiranyagarbha’ are common nouns that have general meanings like `Auspicious One’, `Foremost One’, etc. Hence, statements like `Siva eva kevalam’ are addressed to nArAyaNa only as Siva means auspiciousness. The nArAyaNa suktam contains words like `Sivamachyutam’, where this is seen explicitly. 2) The brihadAranyakOpanishad declares that chith and achith are the body of Brahman (yasya Atma sarIram). Hence, by the body-self analogy, all names that pertain the body also are attributed to the Self due to inseparability. Therefore, for instance, Indra declares `mAm upAsya‘ (I am to be worshipped as supreme) in the Pratardhana VidyA. A similar statement is made by Rudra in the Atharva Siras. Rishi Vamadeva makes the same statement (I was Manu, the Sun) in Br. Up. Prahlada makes yet another such statement in the Vishnu Purana (I am unborn, eternal, lord of all). Here, the `I’ in all these cases denotes the atmA of Indra, Rudra, Vamadeva and Prahlada, namely, the indweller nArAyaNa. So, the statement is taken as `Worship the paramAtmA who has all these beings as his body’. The nArAyaNa suktam also reteirates this by saying `sa brahma sa siva sEndra’. The reason why this interpretational style (sAmAnAdhikaranyam) is needed is simply because these same devas (Brahma, Siva, Indra, etc.) have been described to have births and are non-existent prior to creation. If we take vAkyas like `Siva Eva Kevalam’ as pertaining to ShUlapAni Rudran, it would clash horribly with the Shruti that declares this same Rudran to be subject to birth and death (nArAyaNat rudrO jAyatE, Eko ha vai nArAyaNa………nEshana) Therefore, this interpretation resolves any contradictions. To summarize, if a term like `Siva’ or `Indra’ comes without a description of any specific characteristics, then its general meaning is taken (such as `auspicious’) and attributed to nArAyaNa. If the devatA is specifically mentioned to be kailAsanAthan or svargaloka nAthan, the body-soul analogy is adopted and the referrant is the antaryAmin, nArAyaNa. Considering even rsIs like vAmadeva and jnAnIs like prahlAda have called themselves as Brahman, it is hardly exceptional if Siva or Indra are hailed as such. It is thus appropriate this sarirAtma interpretation is used. Sri Sankara’s Method SrI Adi ShankarAchAryA has upheld the parathvam of Vishnu in his prasthana traya bhAshya and Vishnu SahasranAmA. According to Advaita, Brahman alone is real. But at the level of vyAvahArika sath, Shankarar accepts duality and the presence of a saguna brahman. He identifies this saguna brahman as nArAyaNa. Not just that, he has emphatically made it clear that the other devas are still under the influence of avidyA and that it is only Vishnu who is to be worshipped. Adi Shankara’s sishyAs have also upheld nArAyaNa paratvam. Sureshvaracharya, his prime disciple, compares Shankara to Shiva, the VedAntA to Ganga Devi and says that his achAryan ShankarA bears the VedAntA coming from the lotus feet of Vishnu on his head. This is a comparison to Gangadharan Sivan bearing the Ganga coming from the feet of TrivikramA on his head. Sri Madhva’s Method Coming back to topic, SrI mAdhvAchArya follows a different method. He attributes every name to Vishnu and mainly uses pramAnams from SamhitAs (such as AmbhrAni Sukta which is claimed to be spoken by Lakshmi). His philosophy of Hari SarvOttama (Hari is supreme over all) is as follows – Just as we say `this army is victorious’ which implies that the `King is victorious’, as the army actually belongs to the King and is dependant on the King, all statements glorifying devas simply are intended towards the Being known as Hari, Vishnu. Furthermore, all jivAs are the pratibimbas (reflections) of Vishnu, who is Bimba. The reflections reflect the attributes of the original object; similarly, the glory of all devas is a reflection of the glory of Vishnu. This is the sarva sabda vAchyatvam of mAdhvAchArya. All words and sounds denote Vishnu only. Madhvacharya interprets AmbhrAni Sukta and Manyu Sukta as referring to Lakshmi and Vishnu (Narasimha) respectively. Some of srI mAdhvA’s proofs are given here. I am merely copying and pasting these. The credit goes to https://sites.google.com/site/sridashapramathi/Home/tattvajnana-of-sri-madhva: [PASTE] Vede ramayane caiva purane bharate tatha Adavantau ca madhye ca Vishnuh sarvatra giyate’ If at different places other names like Rudra, Hiranyagarbha are referred, they are only other names by which Sri Vishnu is referred. Sri Vishnu alone has been referred to as Rudra, Indra and other names in the Vedas and Puranas. When Brahma, Rudra and others have been referred as the devotees of Vishnu, these names refer to the corresponding gods who are evolved souls. Thus where we have Siva and Vishnu as one; Siva and Vishnu as Supreme and where we have Siva and Brahma as devotees of Vishnu, we have cogently to interpret as Vishnu who is also known by all the names when referred to as the Supreme God, and Brahma and Rudra and others who are referred to as His devotees as elevated souls in the ranks of gods who worship Vishnu. ‘Yo devanam namadhe eka eva Which means Vishnu alone bears the names of all other gods and that He alone is the Supreme God worshipped by all these names. Again, this sruti refers to : ‘ajasya nabhau athyekamarpitam’ by which is meant, One who has lotus at the navel viz., Vishnu. Thus, Vishnu alone is referred to by various names of gods. Also all names referred to in the Vedas and Puranas have for their prime import only Vishnu as the Supreme God. This in fact gives the Golden Key to unravel the meaning of the Vedas. Having found this key it is now possible to cogently render all meaning for the various visibly conflicting statements. To this also the credit is due to Sri Madhva, who had the uncommon insight into the correct import of the Vedas and other sacred literature. Thus, in the Narayana Sukta, Vishnu has been referred to as: ‘sa brahmas a sivah sa harih sendrah so(s) ksharah paramah svarat This obviously does not mean that Brahma is Vishnu, Siva is Vishnu and Indra is Vishnu. But it only means that Vishnu has the names such as Brahma, Siva and Indra, in fact, all names referring to gods. In the Brahmasutra Bhasya, Sri Madhva conclusively proves how every epithet addressed to the gods refers in the prime import only to Vishnu. Therefore, Vishnu alone is Supreme. He alone is full of auspicious qualities and without any blemish whatsoever. Thus we see that the Supremacy of Sri Narayana is the import of the Vedas and all other sacred literature, which we term as Sanatana. ‘Brahmani brahmarupo(s) sau Sivarupi sivesthitah’ Uddipayan devaganamsa Vishnurdevena rupena’ testify that Vishnu has the forms and attributes of all the gods and all the souls. ‘svasarirantargatavicitra bhagavadakara sadrsakaravatva matrena pratibimbatva muktam’ (Sri Vadiraja Swami) Thus, even though Sri Hari can be worshipped in various forms and names, we should not forget that He is Supreme, full of auspicious qualities, and other essential attributes of the Supreme God. This is the greatness of Sri Madhva’s exposition. [/PASTE] SUMMARY To summarize, SrI Adi Shankara uses the terms nArAyaNa, vAsudevA and Vishnu. SrI rAmAnujar uses the terms nArAyaNa, SrinivAsa, purushOttamA and parama purushA frequently. SrI mAdhva uses the terms Hari, Vishnu and nArAyaNa. During the time of VijayEndra Teerthar, a prominent madhva guru (and also DoddAchAryA of our sampradAya), the shaivite scholar Appayya Dikshitar wished to interpret the entire Vishnu Sahasranama as the names of parvati pati rudran. Since terms like Vishnu, VAsudeva, etc are common nouns, it seemed possible to attribute them to Shiva. But he was unable to attribute the name `nArAyaNa’ to Rudran because of the `na-kAram’. Instead, Appayya Dikshitar also tried to interpret nArAyaNa suktam as referring to a tattvam higher than nArAyaNa. This has also been refuted. For one thing, the very next vAkyam says ‘antar bahIsca tat sarvam vyApya nArAyaNa stitha:’, which declares the sarvAntaryAMitvam of nArAyaNa. So, Dikshitar’s interpretation of the previous vAkya clashes with this and is also not valid for other reasons. The Srikantha Bhashya, a Saiva Vishishtadvaita Bhashya, is wrongly attributed to the 11th century. No vaidika has ever referenced it prior to the 16th century. There has been no documentation of a ‘Saiva Vishishtadvaitam’. Furthermore, the bhashya is a clear copy of Acharya rAmAnuja’s Sri Bhashya with the name ‘nArAyaNa’ replaced by ‘Siva’. Even the places where Sri rAmAnuja used divya prabandham to interpret shruti (kapyAsa pundarIkam evam akshinI:) are replicated, which proves it is a copy since only Sri Vaishnavas use Divya Prabandham to interpret shruti vAkyAs. The book ‘Srikantha Samalochanam’ proves that this srikantha bhAshyam is indeed very recent. Be that as it may, let us address some arguments by Appayya Dikshita in that bhAshya. He argues that nArAyaNa is not the being in the sun because 1) The attribute of lotus-eyed-ness is not exclusively nArAyaNa’s, as even the puranas describe women and kings as lotus-eyed, 2) The third eye is closed, so that is why only 2 lotus eyes are described, which does not negate a third eye, 3) The Rudram describes the Being in the Sun as black/blue-necked. The refutation of this shaiva argument is easy. All these three points are invalid because, 1) While it is true that women and kings are described lotus eyed, the Chan.Up is describing in that context, parabrahman. For that matter, even common people and kings are described as Satyam, Sarvaj~na, etc which are also used to describe Brahman in a particular context such as ‘Satyam jnAnam anantam’, etc. So, in this context, lotus-eyed-ness is only referring to an epithet of Brahman and nobody else. This can only be Vishnu as he is alone known as Pundarikaksha in the sastras. Even the Shiva Purana, which describes a story of Vishnu plucking out his eye and offering it to Shiva, still admits that it is Vishnu who is Pundarikaksha! So, declaring that Pundarikaksha is Rudra and not Vishnu is against what even Sastras favoring Shiva have declared. 2) The idea involves assuming that there is a third eye, the third eye is closed, the upanishad is not describing the third eye, in which case it is giving an incomplete description. These are 3 more assumptions than the theory which simply assumes the being in the sun is lotus eyed. A theory with more assumptions is rejected in favor of one with less assumptions. Furthermore, even if we take the interpretation that the being in the sun has 3 eyes, it still can only be applied to nArAyaNa, since narasimha is Trilochana. In fact, Sri Ranga Ramanuja muni notes that the being is described to have moustache and attributes it to Narasimha! 3) The Rudram does not describe Nilagriva as the being in the Sun, but in the verse ‘Avasarpati NilagrivO vilOhita’, it describes Vishnu, Rudra and Brahma as the manifestations of that Parabrahman, denoted as Rudra and ‘Asau’ (That, signifying parabrahman). Here too, Avasarpati, meaning ‘setting, coming down’, is used to distinguish Vishnu as an avatara as per ajAyamAno bahuda vijAyatE as opposed to the other two. This essay was simply intended to show that although all 3 great acharyas had accepted Vishnu Paratvam. And due to all these reasons, the Rudram is taken to refer to nArAyaNa only. NARAYANA AS THE REFERRENT OF SATARUDRIYAM It is mentioned in the mahAbHAratA that the Satarudriyam was chanted to pArvati pati by Krishna and Arjuna. The Satapatha Brahmana also states that Satarudriyam is chanted to Rudra. How can we then take it as referring to nArAyaNa? As mentioned above, there are many pramAnams, including the Satapatha Brahmana, that declare Rudra had a birth and was named Rudra, Mahadeva, etc. So, these names were existent before and applied to nArAyaNa. The Satarudriyam is addressed to pArvati pati because he is the devatA for this prashnam. But since the antaryAmin of Rudra is NarayaNa, the Satarudriyam directly only addresses the antaryAmin nArAyaNa as testified by the Br.Up (Yasya AtmA sarIram, anganyAnya devatA). Alright, so it denotes the antaryAmin of Rudra. But does that mean the names such as Rudra, Shiva etc denote the antaryAmin of this being as well? Here, we have the pramAnam from the Brahma Sutram, “Sakshadapyavirodham Jaiminih”. It is mentioned that Jaimini believes all names in mantras, despite indicating the antaryAmin of the devatAs, are also *directly* (sAkshAt) interpreted as referring to nArAyaNa. The nyAyA is explained as follows. The Upanishads enjoin meditation on the gastric fire, known as vaisvAnara. Here, the Brahma Sutras state that only the antaryAmin of the gastric fire, ie, nArAyaNa is meditated. At the same time, Jaimini’s opinion is that although the meditation is on the antaryAmin of vaisvAnara (gastric fire), the very term ‘vaisvanara’ is a common noun that means ‘giver of life’ or ‘universal being’ and could *directly* connote nArAyaNa, the antaryAmin of the gastric fire known as vaisvAnara. So, the antaryAmin of vaisvAnara (gastric fire) is also named vaisvAnara. Similarly, the antaryAmin of Rudra is also named Rudra, Shiva, etc. The Narasimha tApanIya Upanishad, which is an authentic Upanishad quoted by Shankara, Vidyaranya, Vedanta Desika, Madhva and Ranga Ramanuja Muni openly refers to Narasimha as Nilalohita, Shankara, Umapati, etc. Furthermore, the Satarudriyam is mentioned as being offered as a praise to Rudra when he demanded that the devas worship him during daksha yaj~na. This clearly shows, 1) There was a point in time when he actually became the devat-a for the Rudram, 2) The fact that he is ‘offered’ this particular portion of veda shows that he is not referred to by all portions of veda and even for this portion, he is just the devata only and not the actual referrant, 3) the actual referrant is nArAyaNa, the antaryAmin. We do not come across anyone ‘offering’ Purusha Sukta or nArAyaNa sukta at a point of time to nArAyaNa. Hence, the Rudram only addresses nArAyaNa directly as well. The final pramAnam is from the Shanti parva of mahabhArata, where Krishna explains his ‘worship’ of Shiva to Arjuna: Mahabharata, Shanti Parva (12.328.5 onwards, dialogue between Lord Krishna and Arjuna), credit goes to Sri Krishna Kadiri for the interpretation: brAhme rAtrikShaye prApte tasya hy amitatejasaH prasAdAtprAdurabhavatpadmaM padmanibhekShaNa tatra brahmA samabhavatsa tasyaiva prasAdajaH In the brahma muhurta, at the end of the night, due to the mercy of the extremely brilliant Lord, a lotus emerged from His navel and in that lotus, Brahma was born, ofcourse, due to His grace. ahnaH kShaye lalAtAchcha suto devasya vai tathA krodhAviShTasya sa~njaGYe rudraH saMhAra kArakaH etau dvau vibudhashreShThau prasAdakrodhajau smR^itau At the end of the day, the Lord [present as antaryAmi of Brahma *] created Rudra out of krodha-guna, to enable him to be the ‘samhara-karta’. Thus, these two ‘fine-among-wise’, Brahma and Rudra, are known to have been born out of grace and anger respectively. * This interpretation is necessary because in the later sections of Moksadharma, Brahma addresses Rudra as a son. tadAdeshita panthAnau sR^iShTi saMhAra kArakau nimittamAtraM tAvatra sarvaprAni varapradau Thus, they carry out the instructed tasks of creation and destruction. However, they, the givers of boons to all the creatures, are just the agents. kapardI jatilo mundaH shmashAnagR^ihasevakaH ugravratadharo rudro yogI tripuradAruNaH dakShakratuharashchaiva bhaga netraharastathA [Rudra has] braided hair with knot of an ascetic and rest of the head bald. He dwells in the home of graveyard, steadfast on vigorous penance as a yogi. He is ferocious to Tripurasuras, destroyed Daksayajna and took away the eyes of Bhaga. nArAyaNAtmako GYeyaH pANDaveya yuge yuge O Arjuna, know that in every yuga, Rudra is ‘nArAyaNAtmaka’. (This phrase can mean: one whose indweller is Narayana, one who is always immersed in Narayana.) tasmin hi pUjyamAne vai devadeve maheshvare sampUjito bhavetpArtha devo nArAyaNaH prabhuH It is the Lord, the prabhu, the Narayana *IN* Maheshvara (the worshipable, the lord of the devas), who is actually worshiped. ahamAtmA hi lokAnAM vishvAnAM pANDunandana tasmAdAtmAnamevAgre rudraM sampUjayAmyaham yadyahaM nArchayeyaM vai IshAnaM varadaM shivam AtmAnaM nArchayetkashchiditi me bhAvitaM manaH O son of Pandu, I am, indeed, the Atma, the indweller of this universe and the worlds. Therefore, I worship myself first, even when I worship Rudra. If I did not worship Rudra, the bestower of boons, in such a way (i.e., worshiping the indwelling Lord first), some would not worship Me, the indwelling Lord, at all – this is my opinion. mayA pramANaM hi kR^itaM lokaH samanuvartate pramAnAni hi pUjyAni tatastaM pUjayAmyaham Whatever I follow and give due worth as a pramaNa, the world follows that. Such pramanas have to be duly followed; therefore I follow them. yastaM vetti sa mAM vetti yo.anu taM sa hi mAm anu rudro nArAyaNashchaiva sattvamekaM dvidhAkR^itam loke charati kaunteya vyakti sthaM sarvakarmasu Whoever knows him, knows Me. Whoever follows him, follows Me. (Though) the world, in all its actions, worships two gods, Rudra and Narayana, it is actually one only who is worshiped. na hi me kenachid deyo varaH pANDavanandana iti sa~ncintya manasA purANaM vishvamIshvaram putrArthaM ArAdhitavAn AtmAnaM aham AtmanA O Son of Pandu, there is, of course, nobody who can grant Me boons. Knowing that well, I worhip Myself, Who am the beginningless and universal power, known as Sarveshvara, for the sake of getting sons. na hi viShNuH pranamati kasmai chidvibudhAya tu R^ita AtmAnameveti tato rudraM bhajAmyaham Indeed Vishnu does not bow to any one and [even when He bows to Himself], for what sake, but for the sake of showing the path to the wise. Therefore, it is the truth that I worship myself even when I worship Rudra. SRI RUDRAM – 1ST ANUVAKAM (It is always important to know the rishi, chandas and devatA for each mantra. For the sake of brevity, I am not stating them here. But interested readers can learn this from vidwAns). INVOCATION om namo bhagavatE rudrAya Meaning: OM, Salutations to Bhagavan Rudra. The invocation salutes the Parabrahman as Rudra. The term `Bhagavan’ denotes that this Being is possessed of the 6 kalyAna gunams (jnAna, bala, veerya, shakti, aishwarya and tejas) and that he is addressed by the name of Rudra, which will be explained shortly. Mantram 1 om namastE rudra manyava utOta ishavE nama:| namastE astu dhanvanE bAhubhyAmUta tE nama:|| Meaning: BhagavAn Rudra! I offer my salutations of “namaha” (not mine) to your anger. I offer my salutations of “namaha” to your arrow and bow. In addition, may my prostrations be to your sturdy arms that carry the bow and arrow. The Being addressed here is sriman nArAyaNan who is known as RudrA. The vedic rules establish that the primary referrant of all names is Vishnu, who is the Parabrahman of the VedA. So, it is fully within the established norms to attribute this name to Vishnu. Other devatas like Brahma, Siva, Indra are all namesakes who bear the names of Bhagavan and are addressed only in a secondary sense. Thus, one must be very clear that this mantram is addressing the consort of Lakshmi and not anyone else. He is known as Rudra which has the following meanings: 1) rum drAvayati iti rudra: – He is Rudra as he is the destroyer of the disease of SamsarA. 2) rOdayati iti rudra: – He is Rudra as he makes one shed tears of joy by enjoying his kalyAna gunams. 3) rudya vAgrUpAya, vAkyam, prApayatEti rudra: – He is Rudra as he is the one who gives the vedic speech to Brahma before creation.(yo brahmanam vidadhati purvamyo vai vedams ca…. – Sve.Up) These meanings are given by SrI parAsara bhattar and SrI ranga rAmAnuja muni. Indeed, the Vishnu SahasranAma has made it clear that all the names of Rudra, Shambhu, Svayambhu, Shiva, Sarva, Sthanu, Bhava, etc. address nArAyaNa only. So, it is established that Rudra is sriman nArAyaNan here. Out of these 3 meanings, which meaning is to be taken as the intent of the veda purushan in the first mantram of the Rudram? Since this mantram addresses the anger of Rudran along with the strength of his arms, it is the 2ndmeaning which seems to fit the context. In other words, the mantra salutes the veeryam and sAttvika krodham of Bhagavan, who is called Rudra here as he makes one weep in joy at experiencing such kalyAna gunams. Is it possible to enjoy the anger of Bhagavan? Is it not true that anger of bhagavan must induce fear and not joy? Can it not be said that the mood of veda purushan is fear here, which will not induce tears of happiness? The answer is that even anger is a kalyAnan gunam for sriman nArAyaNan. Ravanan, SisupAlan and Kamsan, who have borne the anger of BhagavAn, have all also realised his greatness at the end. This itself indicates the purifying nature of his anger. In addition, it is not just the asurAs who enjoy his anger. Even his parama bhagavatas like his anger and enjoy it. Thirumangai azhwar assumed the role of the rakshasas in lanka in periya thirumozhi 10.2. He performed mangalasasanams to the anger of SrI Raaghavan from the role of the rakshasas. So the idea that bhagavad krodham is an undesirable thing is eliminated. Fear of Bhagavan or anger of bhagavan is enjoyable. Now, we come to the important point. The Veda Purushan is saluting the anger of Sriman NArAyaNan. But there is more. Here, in this mantram, we have to meditate on the parama purushan in all his splendour, with an angry frown on his face, brows bent, standing erect with arrow fixed to the bow. He stands as the very personification of kAlam and mrtyu. He, showing all his parathvam and veeryam, is angry with the trespasses of the jivAtmA and intends to destroy the erring chetanan completely. In what form did Sriman nArAyaNan exhibit such rage? The following slokas from vAlmiki rAmAyaNam will make the identity of the parama purushan addressed by the mantram very clear: evam uktvA dhanuSh pANiH krodha visphArita IkShaNaH |babhUva rAmo durdharSho yuga anta agnir iva jvalan|| sampIDya ca dhanur ghoram kampayitvA sharair jagat| mumoca vishikhAn ugrAn vajrANi iva shata kratuH|| Meaning: Speaking as above (ie, admonishing samudra rAjan), Rama with his eyes made larger by anger and wielding a bow with his hand, became dreadful to look at, as a blazing fire at the end of the world. Swaying his terrific bow and making the earth tremble by his violence Rama released the arrow resembling a powerful thunderbolt of Indra (into the ocean). (~ vAlmiki rAmAyaNam – 6-21-(25-26)) It is said that when sriman nArAyaNa took avatAram as srI rAman, the vedA took avatAram as srimad rAmAyaNam. The above slokas clearly prove that the parama purushan being addressed in the first mantra of Rudram is none other than IkshvAku kula tilakam, SrI VeerarAghavan. One should note that bhagavAn’s eyes, which are beautiful owing to their color and length, were made even larger by his anger. He looked more beautiful in his rage. So, with this, let us summarize the meaning of the first mantram of Rudram as follows: “VeerarAghavA (RudrA)! I salute your anger, which is a source of enjoyment for jnAnIs and which enhances your beauty! I salute your bow, which is capable of defeating enemies by itself even without your order. I salute your arrow, even if it is unleashed upon me, as any intent of yours can be nothing but auspicious. I also offer prostrations to your sturdy arms which are beautiful and strong, capable of wielding these weapons”. That SrI rAghavan is meditated upon as such is also the opinion of pArvati pati, who emphatically states: Sri rAma rAma rAmeti ramE rAmE manoramE sahasranAma tatulyam rAma nAma varAnane. . Mantra 2 yA ta ishu: shivatamA shivaM babhUva te dhanuH| shivA sharavyA yA tava tayA no rudra mRuDaya|| Meaning: Oh RudrA! Your arrow become auspicious (by your grace). Your bow has become auspicious (by your grace). The quiver that bears your arrows has become auspicious (by your grace). Let your bow, arrow and quiver confer all benefits to us and make us all happy. In the first mantrA, the anger of BhagavAn was enjoyed and saranAgati (namaha) was performed to this kalyAna gunam, as well as the weapons separately. In this mantrA, it is inferred that this saranAgati has yielded fruits. `tavA’ is interpreted as `by that’ in the sense of `make us happy by all this’. Hence, `tava’ refers to his grace which has resulted in the bow, arrow and quiver becoming auspicious to the devotee. When we say `bow, arrow and quiver’, it is not restricted to that, but also to his other weapons like sudarshanam, pAnchajanyam, nandaki, etc. A question can be posed here as to why does the mantram state that his weapons have `become’ (babhUva) auspicious? Weren’t they auspicious before? This is explained as follows: The rishi enjoyed the anger of bhagavAn and he performed saranAgati to please him in the first mantram. Although bhagavad krodham is a kalyAna gunam due to his nature of being `akhilahEyapratyanIkan’, it is directed at us only because we have done acts against the sAstras. Hence, in order to rectify our mistake, we perform Atma samarpanam. The `namaha’ in the first mantram was indicative of this saranAgati. Now, in the second mantram, bhagavAn is pleased with this chEtanan. He has a sweet smile on his face. His weapons no longer have the intention to harm us. They have transformed into ornaments that can be enjoyed by the devotee. Furthermore, the devotee, owing to his saranAgati, can meditate on the subhAshraya thirumEni of bhagavAn together with the weapons as both ornaments and as representing different tattvams. So, his weapons have now, 1) become ornaments, 2) provide jnAnam to the devotee, 3) provide anandam to the devotee. Hence the word, `becoming’ is used. The Rudram is closely connected with the SvetAsvatArA Upanishad. One of the key features of this Upanishad is a description of bhakti yOga culminating in sAkshAtkAram of subhAshraya thirumEni. Thus, to summarize, his weapons now appear like ornaments to the devotee, who can enjoy his ananta kalyAna gunams now. Mantra 3 yA te rudra shivA tanUragOrApApakAshinI| thayA nasthanuvA shantamayA girishanthAbhichAkasIhi|| Meaning: O Rudra (the destroyer of the disease of samsAra), the creator of Girisha (pArvati pati rudradeva), shine out to us with the body of Yours that is most agreeable on account of causing happiness (shantamayA), and which is auspicious (shivam), which is not terrible (aghorA) and which is of the nature of burning all sins (apApakAsini). This mantra also occurs in the SvetAsvatAra Upanishad (mantra 3.5). It has been commentated upon by srI ranga rAmAnuja muni. At this point, let me state that the Vishishtadvaitic understanding of the Rudram comes primarily from this illuminating commentary of the great AchAryan. So, I am reproducing his commentary on this mantram here. Here, Parabrahman is once again called Rudra. In my first posting, I had given the 3 meanings of this thirunAmam. Considering the subject matter of this mantra (burning all sins, showing auspicious form), the context is right for interpreting Rudra as `destroyer of the disease of samsAra’. He is also referred to as Girishantha. This is explained by srI ranga rAmAnuja muni as follows: girisam tanotIti girisantaH. Girisha refers to pArvati pati rudra. `Anta’ refers to limit, which refers to BhagavAn being the limit, ie, origin, source, cause or birthplace of this Girisha. This is the etymologically appropriate meaning. Why mention he is the creator of girisha here? Because in the SvetAsvatArA, the mantra preceeding this declared this Rudra (BhagavAn) to be the creator of Hiranyagarbha (Brahma). Now, it declares him to be the creator of Girisha (Shiva). Hence, the Upanishad has a particular context in which this mantram occurs, which is also present in the Rudram. The context of this mantra in the Rudram is described as follows. The devotee has performed saranAgati and bhagavAn’s anger is quelled. His weapons have become ornaments and objects of enjoyment for the devotee and have also imparted tattva jnAnam to the devotee. Hence, bhagavAn, out of his nirhEtuka krupa, showed his vishvarUpam to the devotee. In this mantram, the devotee requests bhagavAn to hide his cosmic form and show his thirumEni as senthAmarai kannan and shanka-chakra-gadApAni, which is shantamayA (agreeable due to causing happiness), shivam (auspicious) and apApakAsini (destroys all sins by conferring brahma jnAnam). This is the very same conversation that happened in the Gita between Krishna and Arjuna: Ma te vyatha ma ca vimudha-bhavo drstva rupam ghoram idrn mamedamvyapeta-bhih prita-manah punas tvam tad eva me rupam idam prapasya (~Gita 11.49) Meaning: Whatever fear and whatever perplexity have been caused to you by seeing My terrible form (vishvarUpa), may it cease now. I shall show you the benign form to which you were accustomed before. Behold now that form of mine. arjuna uvaca ~ drstvedam manusam rupam tava saumyam janardanaidanim asmi samvrttah sa-cetah prakrtim gatah (~Gita 11.51) Meaning: Arjuna said ~ Having beheld this pleasing and unique form of Yours, human in configuration, endowed with grace, tenderness, beauty etc., the excellence of which is infinite, I have now become composed, and I am restored to my normal nature. Thus, the bhagavad gita is quoted by srI ranga rAmAnuja muni. Mantra 4 yAmishuM girishanta haste bibharshyastavE | shivAM giritra tAm kuru mA himsI: purushaM jagath || Meaning: O Girishanta (Creator of GirishA/pArvai pati Rudradeva), O Giritra (Lord, who is propounded in the VedAntA), shoot that auspicious arrow you hold in your hand (to destroy the obstacles to my knowledge of Brahman). Do not cause injury to the JivAtmA who is migrating in the samsAra (purusham jagat). This is another mantra that occurs in the svetAsvatArA Upanishad (mantra 3.6). It has also been commented upon by srI ranga rAmAnuja muni, which I have reproduced here. In the 3rd mantra, upon the veda purushan’s request, bhagavAn changed his terror inspiring vishvarUpam (showing all the universes as his body and everything as his form) into his usual divya mangala vigraham. With this change, the kalyAna gunams of bhagavAn could be enjoyed properly. Now, while enjoying these kalyAna gunams and the divya mangala vigraham, the mumukkshu faces another danger. This comes in the form of adhibautika, adhyAtmika and adhidaivaka, the three troubles faced by a chEtanan migrating in samsArA. Therefore, this mantra requests bhagavAn to discharge his sharp arrows at the enemies of the mumukkshu. These enemies are those who hinder enjoyment of bhagavad kaimkaryam and gunAnubhavam. Alternatively, these enemies are also our pApa karmas, which are obstacles as well. The same happens in srimad rAmAyaNam. When samudra rAjan appeases the anger of SrI rAman, he gets a reply from bhagavAn that his arrow needs a target. Upon hearing this, samudra rAjan makes the following statement: tairna tatsparshanam pApam saheyam pApakarmabhiH || amoghaH kriyatAm rAma tatra teShu sharottamaH | (~ vAlmiki rAmAyaNam 2-22-33) Meaning: (Samudra rAjan said:) I am not able to bear that touch of those wicked people, the evil doers. O rAmA, Let this excellent arrow (that is never rendered in vain) be released over them there. The display of his divya mangala vigraham is `sAdhu paritrAnam’. The elimination of the bhagavatan’s obstacles to enjoying bhagavAn is `vinAshAya ca dushkrita’. Additionally, even the 3rd mantra containing the description of vishvarUpam can be taken to address srI rAghavan rather than KrishnAvatAram. Because in the mahaAbhArAta (Vana Parvam), Yudhishthira hears the story of how parashurAmA was defeated by srI rAmA during the confrontation with the Vishnu Dhanus. Here it is said that srI rAghavan, becoming angry with the ahamkAram of parashurAman, showed the latter his vishvarUpam, revealing his identity as sriman nArAyaNan. This is not mentioned by vAlmiki maharishi. Just a bit of information for those with a preference for Rama over Krishna! BhagavAn is Girithra, the One who is revealed in the VedAntA (giri refers to the vedA). It is said in AchArya Hrudayam by Swami Nayanar that the essence of the vedAntA is the nArAyaNa anuvAkam and particularly, srI ashtAksharam (Om namo nArAyaNaya). Hence, sriman nArAyaNan is Girithra, the one known by thirumantram. Mantra 5 ShivEna VachasA tvA GirisAccha VadAmasi| YathA na: sarvamijjagadayakshmagum SumanA asat|| Meaning: GirishA (One who is worthy of veneration)! We strive to attain (Accha) you by auspicious words (shivEna vachasA), in such a manner that the moving beings (humans and animals) of this whole jagath will become (by your grace) free from disease and attain comfort of mind (sumanA). BhagavAn is addressed as girishA here. `Girisha’ refers to one who is worshippable in the form of praise (by the veda). At this point, a question may arise. In mantra 4, the etymological meaning for `girishanta’ was taken to mean that this Being is the creator of girisha, which is a specific epithet of pArvati pati. In this mantra, the same Being is invoked as girisha. Yet, this name is not taken to connote pArvati pati. Is this not a double standard? The answer is no. There are three very simple reasons. One reason is because this Being is addressed as both Girishanta and Girisha, ie, He is the Creator of Girisha as well as Girisha. pArvati pati cannot both be himself and the creator of himself. One must also note that in mantra 4, the term is girishanta and NOT girIshanta, which narrows the term to specifically refer to pArvati pati girisha being created by this Being. So, it would be illogical to take the created being, the husband of pArvati as the object of the next mantram. Secondly, it has been proven that sriman nArAyaNa, the parabrahman, is the primary referrant of all names in the vedA. It has been emphasised that the other devas have only secondary importance. The third reason is the context in which this occurs. In this mantram, this Being is approached with `auspicious words’. In such a context, is it not appropriate to interpret Girisha as `One who is venerable/worshippable’, which indicates that he alone is deserving of such auspicious words addressed to him? Other commentators have also taken `giri’ here to mean `pranavam’ or `cloud’ or antaryAmin of girisha (pArvati pati) as well but these do not fit the context as well. Therefore, this interpretation of Girisha as the one venerated (by the vedA) fits the context like a glove, which makes it correct. One must always take the context into account while interpreting vedic names. This is a standard rule for both shruti and smriti texts. Thus, this interpretation is conclusively established as correct. The word `Accha’ means to attain. So, how do we attain this worshippable bhagavAn? We say auspicious words like `JitantE’ or `Jaya’ or `Svasti’ or ‘Namaha’. He cannot be attained by our own effort; we cannot conquer him by force. But by saying we have lost, or that he is victorious, he can be attained. By such worship, BhagavAn becomes pleased. And when one person starts praising him, other people will join him. The ghoshti of adiyArs continues to increase. In this way, the jagath becomes auspicious. The reference to humans and animals could also be a way of saying that the worshippers will be of different categories – desiring aishwaryam, kaivalyam or kaimkaryam. Or it could be that it causes auspiciousness to the world in general. Some commentators interpret `Accha’ as `pure’. Since he is pure, the words we use to address him also gain their auspiciousness from him. This is also an acceptable interpretation. As he is Girisha, the One worshipped by the vedA, he deserves auspicious praise. This is reiterated in the Gita as follows: arjuna uvAca ~ sthāne hrshIkesha tava prakIrtyA jagat prahrRsyaty anurajyate ca rakShAMsi bhItAni diSho dravanti sarve namasyanti ca siddha-saNghAh|| (~ Bhagavad Gita 11.36) It is but proper (sthAne) that the whole world of gods, Gandharvas, Siddhas, Yaksas,Kinnaras, Kimpurusas, etc., who have foregathered with a desire to see the battle, should be delighted with You and love You after beholding You by Your grace. The word ‘SthAnE’ is what is intended by ‘Girisha’ here. The 6th, 7th, 8th and 9th rks are of great significance and most interesting. Let us recap the last two mantras to understand the significance of the upcoming mantras. We saw that bhagavAn was called `Girithra’, one who is known by the vedAntA. To that, one may pose a question – why should we know the Lord of VedAntA? The next mantra answered that by saying he is Girisha, ie, the venerable Lord. As he is worthy of veneration or worship, he deserves our auspicious words of praise. The next question we ask is –What makes this Being worshippable and deserving of our praise? The answers are below. Mantra 6 adhyavOchadadhivaktA prathamO daivyO bhishak| AhImsccha sarvAn jambhayan sarvAmsccha yAtudhAnyah|| Meaning: May this BhagavAn (sriman nArAyaNa) speak in my favour, He who always speaks in favour of his devotees (adivaktA), who is foremost among upAyams (prathamO), who is known for protecting his adiyArs (daivyO), the best physician (bhishak), who also destroys both perceptible and imperceptible obstacles. This mantram answers the question as to why he is worshippable. BhagavAn is truly unique in the possession of kalyAna gunams that attract the chetanan. These are as follows: He is AdivaktA as he considers the doshams of prapannas as bhOgyam and speaks only in their favour. DoshabhOgyatvam is indicative of his vAtsalyam which is his best gunam (deva), hence it is mentioned first in this rk. He is the foremost (prathamO) both as an upAyam and as a purushArtham. Daivyah refers to his capability of protecting those with Deva bhAvam (ie, his devotees). He is the best doctor (Bhishak) to cure the disease of samsArA as evidenced by his name of Rudran (VaidhyO nArAyaNo harih) He destroys the visible enemies (diseases of body and mind, kAmam and krOdham etc, other samsArIs, troubles by devas, asurAs like hiranyakasipu, etc) as well as the invisible enemies (punya and papa karmas) that prevent us from attaining mOksham (paramam sAmyam upaiti) “May he speak in my favour” is indicative of AnukUlya Sankalpam as well, an angam of saranAgati. In order for him to speak in our favour, we do not obstruct his nrihEtuka kripa and follow the shAstras properly as prapannas. So, we have established that he is worshippable. Now, one question arises. In what way can we worship him? What form must we worship him in? The next rk addresses this question. Mantra 7 Asau yastAmrO Aruna uta Babhrussumangalah| Yeh che mAgum RudhrA abhitO dikshusrithAh sahasraSO vaishAgum heDa ImahE|| Meaning: That (worshippable parama purushan) is seen as deep red (as para vAsudevan). He is reddish brown or rose tinged red (as vyUham). He is also golden colored as the supporter of the earth (vibhava avatarams) and is extremely auspicious (as archa avatAram). He is situated around this jagath in all directions as infinite number of RudrAs (as antarAtma/antaryAmin). We offer our salutations to these forms in such a way that it does not intend disrespect or cause anger. By far, this and the next rk are the most bewildering ones in ShrI rudram. It was only after perusing the tattva traya vyAkhyAnam of srI varavaramuni that everything becomes crystal clear. It is well known that the forms of bhagavAn can be grouped into two categories called `nityOdita’ and `sAntodita’. Etymologically, these have two meanings: 1) Nityodita means that which is always rising (Nitya + Udita). It also means, That (Udita) which is praised by Nitya Suris (Nityas in srI vaikuntA). Hence, this refers to Para vAsudevan. 2) Santodita means that which rises periodically (Santa + Udita). It also means That which is praised by the Chandas (veda) or the Devas. Hence, this refers to the vyUha forms which occur during shrshtI and disappear after samhAram. What ShrI Rudram has done is that, it uses the different colors of the sun as an analogy to describe these forms. This is because when we think of the word `Udita’ (Rising), we are immediately reminded of the Sun. Since `Udita’ is present in `NityOdita/SantOdita’, it is an apt analogy. Furthermore, BhagavAn is often compared with the Sun as he dispels the darkness of Ignorance. That being said, here is the detailed explanation. We can break this mantram into individual words for comprehension. Asau – That Parama Purushan praised by ShrI Rudram. He is directly perceptible. Since Asau is also often used to indicate the Sun (asau AdityO brahma:), which is visible, he is compared with the Sun here. tAmro – This means `deep/coppery red’ color. The sun is at its deepest red when rising. Since para vAsudevan is nityOdita (eternally rising), he is referred to by this. The deep color is an analogy that indicates that this rUpam exhibits ALL kalyAna gunams. The svarUpa nirUpaka dharmams (satyam, jnAnam, etc) and the nirUpita svarUpa viSeshanams (jnanam, balam, Shakti, etc) can be seen. arUna – This is a less reddish color as compared to the previous one and indicates the santOdita forms. How? It is because the santOdita forms are the vyUhams. And as we know, in the 4 vyUhams (or 3, as per some achAryAs), only 2 sets of gunams are revealed. Other gunams are hidden. Hence, this hiding of particular gunams and showing others is indicated by this color, which, though being red, is not the deep red (guna paripUrnatvam) of the previous form. babhrU: – This is the golden color seen at midday. It occurs after rising (deep red) and late morning (arUnam). Hence, it refers to the form after the para: and vyuha:, ie, the vibhava avatArams. The golden color indicates that the deep red svarUpam is hidden and different kalyAna gunams are exhibited depending on the circumstances and purpose of the avatAram. Also, babhrU: means supporter of the earth. So, it indicates the vibhava rUpams who take avatAram for reducing the burden of the earth and sAdhu paritrAnam. sumangalaH – Very easily interpreted as archa avatArams, the forms in temples and houses. Our achAryAs have always praised this form as the most auspicious and the most complete form. It is the height of soulabhyam and sousIlyam. sahasrashO rudrAH: – `sahasrashO’ here does not mean thousand, but infinite. rudrAH refers to the antaryAmin. So, this refers to his all-pervasiveness and omniscience (aham AtmA gudAkEsa; adiyEn ullAn udaL ullAn). If we take the terms `sahasrashO’ and `rudrAH’ separately rather than one as adjective, it can convey the two forms of antarAtmA of chith and achith (sarvam khalv idam brahma:) as well as antaryAmin (residing in the heart of all creatures). Additionally, by describing these forms, this rk is also describing his kalyAna gunam of soulabhyam. heDa Imahe refers to praising these forms in a way which does not caused disrespect or anger. In other words, the rk says that though these forms have been described differently, the bhaktan must NOT consider one form as lesser than the other. They are all equally potent and possess all kalyAna gunams despite one appearing after another or one exhibiting more gunams than another. This is as per the veda vAkyams `neha nAnAsti kincana:’. If we ascribe any limitation to a form or say that it is a product of karma or equate these forms to that of manushyAs or devas, it is the height of stupidity (avi~jananthi Mam Muda:, says gitAchAryan). Also, the fact that we worship these forms in a way to not cause disrespect or anger is prAtikulya varjanam. SayanachAryar, Bhatta BhAskarar and all the other revered commentators have not interpreted this rk correctly. Despite acknowledging the supremacy of Vishnu in Purusha Suktam and other rks, they have misunderstood this rk as referring to antarAditya vidyA, which is not even relevant to the context nor is hinted here. Having established the fact that bhagavAn is deserving of praise owing to his kalyAna gunams, and that he can be worshipped in the 5 forms of para:, vyUha:, vibhava, archai and antaryAmin, the question posed now is – how can this being, who has so many forms be approached for worship? Is this worship easy or hard? The 8th mantra clarifies this. Mantra 8 Asau yOavasarpati nIlagrIvo vilOhitaH | utainam GopA AdruSaNadrusAnnudahAryah | Utainam vishvA bhUtani sa drashto má¹›DayAthi nah|| Meaning: That (Rudran) descends (as Vishnu), is (the antaryAmin of) blue necked one (Shiva) and is (the antaryAmin of) the reddish colored one (Brahma). Even the cowherds and women who carry water can see him. He is also thus seen by all beings. May he confer bliss (of the form of bhagavad kaimkaryam) to us. The meaning of this mantram must be abundantly clear. Having talked about BhagavAn’s soulabhyam in the previous mantram, his sousIlyam is described here. In order to facilitate others to see, enjoy and perform kaimkaryams to him, BhagavAn has descended into the material world. The term `avasarpati’ means `descending’ or `coming down’, which means that he has taken an avatAram as Vishnu among the devas. Hence, this term `avasarpati’ is used to distinguish Vishnu, the sAkshAt pUrnAvatAram of sriman nArAyaNa from the other two, Brahma and Rudra, who are jivAtmAs having bhagavAn as their antaryAmin. `NilagrIvA’ denotes Shiva with the blue neck from swallowing the deadly poison. `vilOhitaH’ denotes red color and hence, refers to Brahma who has a reddish complexion due to rajO gunam. The color red always denotes rajO gunam and this color is associated with creation. So, this refers to Brahma. Thus, this rk refers to bhagavAn’s presence as the inner controller of these two devas. Is his descent only limited to being among the great and powerful devas like Brahma and Rudra? No. The rk beautifully states that even the simple cowherds and women who carry water can see him. In addition to these two categories, he is seen by all beings. This includes plants, animals, asurAs, nAstikas, etc. He has appeared in many forms (ajAyamAno bahudA vijAyatE) as a boar, fish, dwarf mango tree, a forest, an arrow and many other rUpams as per the purAnas. Nobody is excluded from his krupai. This is as gitAchAryan says `samOham sarva bhutEshu’. The last line states that in this way, he gives us the chance to experience brahmAnandam by performing kaimkaryam and enjoying his kalyAna gunams. `Brahma nArAyaNa: Sivascha nArAyaNa:’ says the nArAyaNopanishad and adds that this is the sAram of yajur vedam. Rudram is a part of this yajur vedam. Hence, BhagavAn nArAyaNa is addressed by all sacrifices. Mantra 9 namo astu nIlagrIvAya sahasrAkshAya mIDhusHe | atho ye asya saTvAnohaM tebhyokaraM namaH || Meaning: Salutations to (the antaryAmin) of the blue necked one (Shiva), the Thousand Eyed One (Indra), the showerer of rains (parjanyan) or One who showers boons (DevaperumAl). I (the veda purushan) also offer my salutations to his adiyArs. Having described the kalyAna gunams, the Veda Purushan is now saluting BhagavAn in his form as the antaryAmin of his prime vibhUtIs – Rudra, Indra and parjanyan (ref. vibhUti yOga adhyAyam of bhagavad gita). Or, since `midhuSHE’ can be interpreted as a direct salutation to BhagavAn himself instead of parjanyan as he is the one who grants the desires of his devotees like a dark, rain bearing cloud. The reason why nIlagrIvan is mentioned first is because of what happened at the conclusion of daksha yAgam. After Shiva’s altercation with Daksha and subsequent restoration of peace and normality, it was agreed that he (Shiva) would get the major portion of the havis in yAgams. Since the Rudram is part of the yajur vedam that deals with such yAjnas and their fruits, Shiva is mentioned first as an important vibhUti of perumAl. Second comes Indra, who is associated with jyOtishtOma yAgam and ashwamedha yAgams. He too, is an important vibhUti of emperumAn. Note that it would be possible to interpret `sahasrAkshan’ as BhagavAn himself. But this would mean that `nIlagrIvan’ would be the only vibhUti mentioned, which renders it rather out of context if the other two terms (sahasrAkshan and midhUshE) are interpreted as BhagavAn. Thus, it is better to take `sahasrAkshan’ as referring to Indra. Parjanyan is also very important as he is responsible for rains. But here, it can be taken to mean bhagavAn himself rather than parjanyan. Lastly, the veda purushan offers his salutations with naichyam to the great devotees of the parama vaidika sampradAyam, indicated by the term `satvAnaH’. Mantras 10 and 11 Pramuncha DhanvanastvamubhayorArthinayorjyAm | YAsCha tE hasta ishavah ParA tA Bhagavo vapa|| (10) avatatya Dhanusthvagum sahasrAksha satEshudhe | NisIrya salyAnam mukhA Shivo nah sumanA bhava || (11) Collective meaning: RudrA! Please untie the bowstring from both ends of your bow. Also, lay down your arrow. (10) You, who have a thousand eyes, ie, you are omniscient (sahasrAkshan) and bear a hundred quivers, ie, you are omnipotent (satEshudhE), must loosen the bowstring and blunt the tips of your arrows, thus becoming peaceful (ie, confer auspiciousness) to us. (11) The veda purushan appeased the anger of bhagavAn in the 1st mantram and has elucidated all the tattvArthams required for a prapannan till the 9th mantram. Now, the 10th and 11th mantras once again make a request to bhagavAn to curb his anger. The context can also be established as follows. Up till now, the veda purushan had described and enjoyed the kalyAna gunams of bhagavAn. Now, he remembers the anger of bhagavAn which had initially impelled him to perform saranAgati. So now, he is saying, “On account of possessing such auspicious attributes and my own realisation of this truth, you have no reason to be angry with me”. The 11th mantram calls him `sahasrAkshan’ and `satEshudhE’. This refers to his omniscience and omnipotence. `satEshudhE’ means that he bears a hundred quivers. So, he has a plentiful stock of arrows, or in other words, his power is inexhaustible, indicative of omnipotence. Why mention this? It is to highlight that our prArthanai for dispelling his anger is not the upAyam to dispel said anger. The upAyam to quell bhagavAn’s anger is bhagavAn himself, who being omniscient, is aware of the plight of the chEtanan. His omnipotence means that he only is capable of fulfilling the desires of the chEtanan. The 11th mantram states that he himself, who is omniscient and omnipotent, must loosen the bowstring and blunt the arrows. In other words, he HIMSELF is the upAyam to do this and no-one else. Our prArthanai is not an upAyam. Self-effort is insignificant compared to his grace. He must look on us with a favourable intent (shivam). Mantras 12 and 13 vijyaM dhanuH kapardinO vishalyO bANavAn.h uta | aneshaNasyesHava Abhurasya nisHangathiH || (12) yA te hetirmIDhusHTama haste babhUva te dhanuH | tayA-smAnvishvatastvamayakshamayA pariBhuja || (13) Collective Meaning: May the bow of Kapardin be without his bowstring. May his quiver be without arrows. May his arrows be unable to pierce us. May his scabbard be reduced in power. (12) BhagavAn who fulfils the desires of his devotees! You protect your devotees with your weapons, which have become the non-harmful bow in your hand, everywhere and at all times. (13) The 12th mantram refers to the fact that bhagavAn’s weapons have become ornaments for his devotees. The term `kapardin’ means 1) one with shaggy mane or 2) one who can do things that are beyond the powers of others. The second meaning fits the context. He alone can protect us and delight us, so he is Kapardin. It must be noted that Narasimha is also called Kapardin when the 1st meaning is taken due to his shaggy mane. The 13th mantram states that these weapons, although ornaments to devotees, become fearsome to the enemies of these devotees. He protects his devotees from all sides and everywhere with weapons which appear harmless to his adiyArs. We are reminded of srI rAmAvatAram when srI rAghavan and srI lakshmanan protected the sleeping vAnaras. Mantras 14 and 15 namaste astvAyudhAyAnAtatAya dhRsHNave| ubhAbhyAmuta te namo bAhubhyAM tava dhanvane|| (14) pari te dhanvano hetirasmAnvRNaktu vishvataH| athO ya ishhudhistavArE asmannidhehi tam.h|| (15) Collective meaning: My salutations to your powerful weapons that are not intended to kill us. My salutations go to your sturdy arms that hold the bow. (14) May your arrows discharged from your bow spare us everywhere. Please keep your quiver far away from us. (15) The 14th rk praises his weapons as ornaments. Just as a devotee keeps the parathvam of BhagavAn in mind while enjoying his soulabhyam and sousIlyam, similarly, the veda purushan keeps the prowess and strength of the weapons in mind while enjoying and praising them as harmless ornaments. It is very necessary to understand both aspects. This indicates the quality of agatithagatana samarthyam (combining opposites) The purusha suktam refers to this as ahO rAtrE (day and night). Contradictory things are reconciled by him. He has both the eagle (Garuda) and the Snake (Adi SeshA) as servants. His weapons are both ornaments and weapons. His body is black colored, which is a color that indicates tamO gunam, but which has transformed into pure suddha sattvam in association with him. The last and 15th mantram of the 1st anuvAkam, prays for lOkakshemam, or it could be a prayer to avoid Adhibautika, AdhyAtmika and Adhidaivaka troubles. A jnAni feels compassion for all the jivAs struggling in samsArA and how they have become objects of bhagavAn’s anger. So, the veda purushan, placing himself along with those jivAs as well, asks on behalf of those chEtanAs to be spared from the wrath of bhagavAn’s arrows. This is indica LikeLike
    • Dear Sir,
      Don’t worry. I am not an escapist unlike the admin of the blog you copied this content from, who is absconding since I asked him to prove Shaivism hoax by virtue of scientific evidences. And as far as my knowledge about Sanskrit is concerned, Sanskrit I know is enough to decode Vedic Tatvam and correlate them with science. I doubt how much you know as you are simply cheating yourself by copying directly from others. I also saw your reply on my comment on Srimad Bhagavatam. So can you tell me what makes you claim that Shiva Purana is bogus? Yes, in several sections like Shiva-Ganesha war have been interpolated as all Puranas due to their simple language are vulnerable to interpolations. But Shiva Purana doesn’t contradicts Vedas. That we will discuss later when I’ll refute the content sent by you. But the reasons of why Srimad Bhagavatam is bogus are gleaned from Mahabharata itself and that too by the virtue of Acharyaji’s teachings. I can produce ample evidences directly from Mahabharata which will prove that Bhagavatam is not authentic. The point I will produce will be as follows:
      1) SB contradicts MB’S description of Parikshita’s death.
      2) SB contradicts MB’S description of Mahanta Suka Bhadra’s biography.
      3) SB contradicts MB’S description of Parikshita’s birth.
      4) SB contradicts MB’S description of Brahmashira episode.
      5) SB contradicts Rig Vedic verse 7:46:1, which says that Lord Shiva is invincible and cannot be defeated.
      So the decision is your’s. If you want, I can provide the above evidences in my next comment.
      Before I begin, I would like to ask you, are you disrespecting me? Well,let me make it clear that I have no respect. Other than me, no one honor’s me and I haven’t given anyone the right of honoring me either. Then what’s the use of insulting me? You are simply killing your time by making doomed attempt to do so. And don’t get so much agitated. Keep cool. Why are you increasing you blood-pressure?

      First of all, you say that the Vedic hymns addressing Lord Shiva are addressed to the so-called “Antaryamin” of Lord Shiva i.e., Lord Vishnu. The basis of this allegation is the misconception that Lord Shiva is “born” out of Brahma. This is because most Vaishnavas go for the literal meaning of Vedic verses. I don’t thing you’ll understand if I explain this by the example of Sanskrit literature. So I’ll give the example of Chhayavadi school of Hindi poetry. In this school, the meaning of the poem is esoteric rather than literal. The words are cryptic and difficult to be decoded. So you can say that the Sanskrit school of writing to which Vedas belong and Chhayavadi school are identical by virtue of there salient features. In reality, Lord Shiva is unborn.
      “Pragâpati said to him, ‘My boy, why criest thou, when thou art born out of labour and trouble?’ He said, ‘Nay, but I am not freed from (guarded against) evil; I have no name given me: give me a name!’ Hence one should give a name to the boy that is born, for thereby one frees him from evil;–even a second, even a third (name), for thereby one frees him from evil time after time”. (Satapatha Brahmana 6:1:3:9)
      This is the verse which makes Vaishnavas think that Rudra was born and the narrative of Rudra emerging from Brahma in Vaishnava Puranas is true. Vaishnavas say Rudra is not freed from evil hence he was sinful. But let us see what Yajurveda says about Rudra:
      “O Rudra your aspect which is peaceful, and is bereft of sins.” (Yajurveda iv:5:1:c)
      The central message of this scene is the manifestation of Ashtamurti from Rudra. The reference of Evil is because of Brahma’s incestuous relationship with his daughter Usha, but it is nothing to do with Rudra. Satapatha Brahmana treats Prajapati’s copulation with usha as sinful as stated below:
      “Pragâpati conceived a passion for his own daughter,–either the Sky or the Dawn. ‘May I pair with her!’ thus (thinking) he united with her. This, assuredly, was a sin”. (Satapatha Brahmana 1:7:4:1-2)

      Prajapati and Usha, when mated, Rudra was invoked by gods and he beheads Prajapati because on the grounds of incest. Prajapati and Usha mated again and this act was sinful and here also here Rudra appeared, but Rudra didn’t behead prajapati but he tactfully made him to pronounce the holy eight names of Rudra viz. Bhava, Sarva, Ugra, Pasupati, Asani, Mahadeva and Isana; and Rudra playfully stated as if he himself was not freed from sin. And on Rudra’s request, Prajapati uttered Rudra’s eight holy names and Prajapati became freed of his sin and also escaped Rudra’s wrath. Now this couldn’t have happened if Rudra did not pre-exist Brahma.
      The manifestation of Rudra from Prajapati is a symbolic tale because Prajapati was the year (symbolic of Time) and Usha symbolizes space. Rudra’s manifestation through Prajapati and Usha in other words means that Rudra who is beyond time and beyond space, entered and appeared within this universe of space-time coordinates and from his own eight names he transformed himself into eight deities viz. Agni, Vayu, Varuna, Plants (representing earth), Indra, Parjanya (representing cloud and sky), Chandra & Surya.
      So from these, we see that Lord Shiva was never born and he pre-exists Brahma. So he cannot be a Jiva with an Antaryamin. So the question of Sri Rudram and other hymns being addressed to Lord Vishnu doesn’t arises.

      Mahashay, gyan hona atyant uttam lakshan hai ek uttam vyaktitva ke swami/swamini ka. Parantu yadi aap usi gyan ke ahankar mein samne wale ko murkh samjhenge, toh kahna toh nahi chahiye par aapse adhik murkh is akhil vishva mein aur koi nahi.
      Sri Ram jai Ram jai jai Ram.

      Like

  10. Maya is great, see how people are fighting with each other based on nama roopa. Nama roopa brings division. When you say you are vaishnavite, you first create a boundry or division line from rest of the beings. There is no division in the creation of Ishwara.
    Raise above nama roopa to merge into presence. You are the presence.
    First of all you should be there to be aware of Krishna or Shiva.
    You are shining in that light of awareness which projects you and all the thoughts krishna,shiva,durga all shine in that light.
    You are Sat-Chit-Anand. Shivoham shivoham

    Like

  11. Regarding Gaudiyas, the different names given in the Vedas like Rudra,Indra, Prajapati,Manyu,Agni,etc. are all names of Sri Krishna only.
    This is given in the Govinda bhashya of Baladeva Vidyabhushana. For further information, visit this site:
    http://bkdemian.blogspot.in/2011/04/brahmans-diverse-nomenclature.html
    The above site is very informative and will help us Gaudiya Vaishnavas to counter-attack the false things spoken by avaishnavas ,who quote from the Vedas and give their own false interpretation. Please read the Sat Sandarbhas of Jiva Goswami also which has helped me immensly in these matters. By following and understanding the philosophy of ACHINTYA BHEDABHEDA and SHAKTI PARINAMAVADA , one can easily understand the Vedas perfectly all thanks to the most munificient merciful Lord Gauranga!

    Like

  12. @Sarva nama kevala Hari nama Yes, the Vaishnava interpretation is after all an interpretation, which may not be true. But as a Suryavanshi, I speak only truth and truth is what I adhere to, not “interpretations”. Interpretations are variable, truth is constant. By the mercy of Lord Ram, I have comprehended the simple truth that Lord Shiva is the only Supreme and I have thus debunked the Vaishnava “interpretation” of your dear Narayanastra Blog in my own blog:
    http://shiva-parvati.blogspot.in/
    If you are really a devotee of Lord Krishna, you will definitely follow this link and see how the Vaishnava “interpretation” crumbles under the hammer of truth. Lord Shiva was, is and will be the only Supreme, and that’s the harsh truth that we are bound to submit to. Truth is not dependent on “interpretations”. It is independent and others including “interpretations” are dependent on it. So take my advice, feuding over Vedas is not the job of mlechha institutions like ISKCON and Dravidian slaves like admin@narayanastra blog and humble bhagawata bandhu. Better leave it to Aryans and rather chant “Sri Ram jai Ram jai jai Ram” mantra. That will atleast atone the sins that you people committed by blaspheming Lord Rudra’s name.

    Like

  13. Dear advaithin,
    With full respect to the philosophy of Kevalaadvaita and Sripad Shankaracharya Bhagatpada, you should know that the light theory of Brahman and the theory of Saguna Brahman is limited to Advaita only. Plus it is a fact that Shankara himself established Vishnu alone as his saguna brahman. Advaita allows bheda between Ishwara and jiva in the vyavahrika level. Only at “paramarthika ” level does it teach that everything is Brahman. saguna brahman identified by Adi Shankara is Vishnu only and not Shiva. Unlike mordern day advaitins, Adi Shankara and most advaita acharayas never wore bhasma or worshipped Shiva as supreme. Neither did they advocate panchOpAsaNa. Historians have proved that the only authentic works of shankara are his bhashyas and not the stutis that are claimed to be his creations. Soundarya lahiri, Dakshinamurti stotra etc. are creation of recent days matha adhikaris who were also called Shankaracharyas. In his bhashyas he uses only names like Vishnu,Vasudeva,Narayana, etc. to indicate Saguna Brahman and he personally in Gita bhashya (6.47) that among the yOgis, those who worship Rudra, Aditya, etc. are inferior to those who are vAsudEva bhaktas: [GBhS:9]
    yoginām api sarveṣāṃ rudrādityādi-dhyāna-parāṇāṃ madhye mad-gatena mayi vāsudeve samāhitenāntarātmanāntaḥ-karaṇena śraddhāvān śraddadhānaḥ san bhajate sevate yo mām, sa me mama yuktatamo ‘tiśayena yukto mato ‘bhipreta iti
    Shankara also says in the pA~ncarAtra adhikaraNa (Brahma Sutra Bhashya, 2.2.42) that there are certain aspects of the Pancharatra doctrine which are to be accepted, and says that worshipping Lord Vishnu as the Supreme Soul with unceasing ananya devotion as inculcated by the Pancharatra Shastras is as per the vEda and smRtis. However, Shankara does not make any such approving statements regarding the rites of worship according to the shaiva doctrine (discussed in the previous adhikaraNa, from 2.2.37-2.2.41). Shankara rejects the whole doctrine as vEda bAhya. He does not identify the pUja aspect of the shaivas to be according to the vEda. Lastly people claiming to be saviours of Sanatana Dharma, come to these sites and come to “end’ the Vaishnava-Saiva debates by claiming that they are both same. This theory is not older than the 16th century and much flawed.

    Like

  14. Dear Miss Nilalohita

    I am simply not worried for anything. I thank you for your concern. Let’s begin without further ado. The ending from your last write up ( mentioned below ), let me take that up first for your satisfaction.
    YOUR STATEMENT
    “Mahashay, gyan hona atyant uttam lakshan hai ek uttam vyaktitva ke swami/swamini ka. Parantu yadi aap usi gyan ke ahankar mein samne wale ko murkh samjhenge, toh kahna toh nahi chahiye par aapse adhik murkh is akhil vishva mein aur koi nahi.”

    My Humble Submission

    Where is the problem? I unquestionably & humble submit to you that … I am an agyani, I am a papi, I am murkh, I am ahankari, I in no way merit to be called a Krishna devotee and frankly I am myself convinced that I am much worse than all of above stated by you or anyone on this webpage till now, for if I was minus all of the above mentioned shortcomings, why would I’ve still been languishing in this materialistic creation, which is full of misery? I would have had the fortune of being a servant of a servant of a servant of a pure devotee of Krishna and would have attained his abode by now breaking away for all time sake from this cycle of birth and death. All, the shortcoming that you have seen in me I accept them as simple facts & do so with all humility.
    But here on this web page Miss Nilalohita we are not discussing my personal shortcomings. We are discussing about Krishna! who is The Supreme Personality Of Godhead and stating so in all firmness, backing it up with quotes / verses of our Holy Vedic Scripture is called “Authority” or authoritative statement not “ahankar” but refuting that with stupid concoctions needless to remind, which lacks any backing of our holy Vedic Scripture, in short, simply talking gibberish, should strongly and unrelentingly be condemned and my doing so is not privy to a rascal or as many rascals permission ( my contempt is not personal in nature addressed to just one rascal but all the rascals who acts in the above mentioned manner). In case you think my blood pressure is shooting up or I am losing my head, pls, let me comfort you since you were quite concerned last time round, “No” … LOL!

    My intention is to put the “Absolute Truth, Krishna!” out there for all to read and get benefited from. If you think I thought my last write up was meant for you to run away you are more naive than I thought. I sincerely hope you don’t run away because, as many times you keep coming back with your pathetic understanding of our sacred Holy Scriptures… sadly only based evidently on your foolery, the more chance I shall have to achieve my objective. So pls don’t run away. Keep coming every day and don’t stop for I assure you in all seriousness I wouldn’t…
    All that you have written has already been answered in my previous write up. Oh but yes you simply discarded it by calling it copied from some other blog and so it is. In fact the writer of that blog and I, correspond with each other discussing these issues. I feel copying from that blog was an amazing thing to do as it answered all your foolish misconceptions and beautifully brought forth, The truth about Krishna.

    Now let me get this correct that blog, which has only quoted verses from Vedas, Puranas and our other holy scripture not to forget has been well researched and dexterously been put up there is bogus, Srimad Bhagvatam, which is called the only Maha Puran by Vyasa himself and was written by Vyasa with Dev Rishi Narada, is among the 18 puranas, is also bogus and who has no status or intellect, who has this habit of saying Acharyaji, Acharyaji, Acharyaji, Acharyaji… hahahaha ( in the most animated, foolish yet laughable manner ) is to be considered genuine… LOL!… when you said 76 people have copied and have pasted that blog content for you… funny that you so proudly declare it … but all it did was to STATE that you in fact are a foolish person beyond redemption. Seriously! Like really! … hahahahahaha… 76 people tried and failed with you … Good God… It’s like singing before a buffalo… LOL! … but what’s the harm in trying again only here even if this buffalo fails to learn certainly others will.

    Let’s get to your accusation of SB contradicting Vedas… and then you state Rig Veda… Not just you but I want all to see here on this web page why I have felt the need to rightly call you Miss Nilohita… foolish

    asya devasya milhuso vaya visnoresasya prabhrthe havirbhih
    vide hi rudro rudriyaM mahitvaM yAsiSTaM vartirashvinAvirAvat || RV 7.40.5 ||

    With offerings I propitiate the branches of this swift-moving ( super soul ) God, the bounteous Vishnu. Hence Rudra gained his Rudra-strength: O Asvins, ye sought the house that hath celestial viands.

    After reading this you should atleast now know Miss Nilohita that neither your understanding of SB is in place as for Rudra being invisible he is so because of Vishnu who resides in him as his supersoul and makes him so. Its not his own strength but the strength provided to him by Vishnu. Its not actually Rudra / Shiva who is invincible but its Vishnu who is so. That is why it is said in the Vedas and our other holy scriptures that Vishnu pervades everything and everyone and you claim to understand Sanskrit… God Miss Nilohita hahahahahahahaha.

    “Savo deve eko Narayana na dwitiyacha kaschit”
    There is only one God Narayana and no second
    [Yajur Veda]

    From the Yajur Veda and Narayana Upanishad of the Yajur Veda:

    Ata Nityo Narayanaha, Brahma, Narayanaha, Sivascha Narayanaha, Kalascha Narayanaha. Disascha Narayanaha, Vidisascha Narayanaha, Urdwamscha Narayanaha, Adhascha Narayanaha, Antar-bahischa-Narayana.Narayana Eh Vedam Sarvam, Yat BhootamYacchha Bhavyam.Nish-kalango Niranjano Nirvikalpo Nirakyadhas,suddhho Deva Eko Narayanaha, Na dwiteeyosthi kaschit,ya evam Vedas Vishnu reva Bhavati, Sa Vishnureva Bhavathi, Etat yajur veda sirodeeyathe.
    “Narayana is perpetual, Brahma come from Narayana, Siva comes from Narayana, Time comes from Narayana. Up, down,all around is Narayana. Inside and outside is Narayana. Narayana is what has happened, what is happening and what will happen. Narayana is the only God who is blemishless, stainless, odorless, endless and who cannot be described. When Narayana is there, there is no other second. He who knows this, achieves Lord Vishnu. Thus read, Yajur Veda.”

    Rig Veda 7.40.5: Rudra gets his strength by propitiating Vishnu.
    Rig Veda 7.99.1-4: Vishnu is said to create Suurya and Agni.
    Rig Veda 10.90.13: States that Brahman (here addressed as The Purusha) created Suurya, Agni, Indra, Vaayu, and Chandra
    Rig Veda 10.121.2: States that He (here addressed as Hiranyagarbha) is the “Giver of vital breath, of power and vigour, he whose commandments all the gods acknowledge.”
    Rig Veda 10.190.3: States that Brahman (here addressed as Dhaatar) created Suurya and Chandra
    Aitareya Upanishad 1.2.1-4: States that He created the devas, provided them with nourishment, and ordered them into their respective abodes
    Brihadaaranyaka Upanishad 1.3.1-18: Refers to the devas as Prajaapati’s sons, and explains how they had to surpass the asuras by learning the process of yagna (they could not do it without).
    Brihadaaranyaka Upanishad 1.4.10: Says that only the devas “became that” (Brahman) by understanding knowing Brahman. But if the devas are already the all-knowing Brahman, then from whence the question of not understanding that?
    Brihadaaranyaka Upanishad 2.1.20: States that all devas emanate from Brahman. Note that this mantra concludes the chapter in which Gargya speaks of meditating on Brahman within each of the devas.
    Brihadaaranyaka Upanishad 3.6.1: Gaargi asks by what is the world of the devas pervaded. The ultimate answer is of course Brahman. But the point is, the devas, if Brahman, shouldn’t be pervaded by something else.
    Brihadaaranyaka Upanishad 3.9.1-11: This is the famous antaryaami Braahmana in which it is stated that Brahman inhabits (among other things) the various devas presiding over moon, sky, the directions, the sun, etc, yet is not known by them.
    Brihadaaranyaka Upanishad 4.4.16: States that the devas meditate on that Brahman as light/longevity.
    Brihadaaranyaka Upanishad 5.5.1: States that the devas, along with men and asuras are Prajaapati’s sons.
    Brihadaaranyaka Upanishad 5.5.1: States that Brahman created Prajaapati, and Prajaapati created the devas.
    Chaandogya Upanishad 4.3.1-7: Describe He who swallowed the other four devas (agni, vAyu, ApaH, prAna), and then describes Him as the creator of all beings.
    Katha Upanishad 2.3.3: States that the devas (Agni, Vaayu, Indra, Suurya, and Mrtyu) carry out their respective functions out of fear of Him (Brahman).
    Mundaka Upanishad 2.1.7: States that from Him emerged the devas and all other living entities.
    Prashna Upanishad 2.1-4: Explains how the various devas presiding over different parts of the body are all subordinate to Vishnu.
    Narayana Suktam:
    narayanam mahagnyeyam vishvatmanam parayanam |
    narayana paro jyotir-atma narayanah parah || 4 ||
    Lord Narayana is the greatest knowledge (Mahajneya), the soul of the world (Visvatma) and the best refuge (parayana). Narayana is the most effulgent (Parajyoti), Narayana is the Super soul (Paramatma).
    narayanam param brahma tatvam narayanah parah |
    narayana paro dhyata dhyanam narayanah parah || 5 ||
    Narayana is the Supreme Absolute (Parambrahma), Narayana is the Supreme Tattva (Paratattva). Narayana is the best of those who meditate (Paradhyata) and the best of meditations (Paradhyana).”
    Rig Veda 1.22.18
    trini pada vi cakrame visnurgopa adabhyah
    ato dharmani dharayan
    Vishnu, the Guardian, he whom none deceiveth, made three steps; thenceforth establishing his high decrees.
    Rig Veda
    asya devasya milhuso vaya visnoresasya prabhrthe havirbhih
    vide hi rudro rudriyam mahitvam yasistam vartirasvinaviravat

    With offerings I propitiate the branches of this swift-moving God, the bounteous Vishnu. Hence Rudra gained his Rudra-strength: O Asvins, ye sought the house that hath celestial viands.

    Taittiriya Samhita 5.5.1

    aniravamo devatAnAM viShNuH paramaH
    Vishnu is the supreme amongst devatas.
    dādhāra dakṣamuttamamaharvidaṃ vrajaṃ ca viṣṇuḥ sakhivānaporṇute
    “Viṣṇu hath power supreme and might that finds the day” (Rig Veda 1:156:4)
    oṃ tad viṣṇoḥ paramam padam sadā paśyanti sūrayaḥ
    “All the suras (i.e., the devas) look always toward the feet of Lord Vishnu.” (Rig Veda, 1:22:20)
    agnirvai devanamavamo vishnuh paramah tadantara sarva devatah
    “Agni is the lowest and Vishnu is the highest among devas. All other gods occupy positions that are in between.” (Aitareya Brahmana 1.1.1)
    “Then we shall expound the Mahopanishad. They say Narayana was alone. There were not Brahma, Shiva, Waters, Fire and Soma, Heaven and Earth, Stars, Sun and Moon. He could not be happy” (Maha Upanishad: I-1-4)
    “Narayana desired to create people. Because of this thought, Soul (prana) rose from him. Mind and all body parts, sky, air, light, water and the earth which can carry all these created beings took their form. From Narayana, Brahma was born. From Narayana, Rudra (Shiva) was born. From Narayana, Indra was born .From Narayana those people who rule these human beings were born. From Narayana, the twelve suns, eleven Rudras, Eight Vasus and all those meters (for writing) were born. All these function because of Narayana. All these end in Narayana. Thus is read, the Upanishads of Rig Veda.” (Narayana Upanishad)
    om namah
    sac-cid-ananda-rupaya
    krishnayaklista-karine
    namo vedanta-vedyaya
    gurave buddhi-saksine
    Om namah. I offer my respectful obeisances to Shri Krishna, whose form is eternal and full of knowledge and bliss, who is the rescuer from distress, who is understood by Vedanta, who is the supreme spiritual master, and who is the witness in everyone’s heart.[Goapl Tapani Upanishad 1.1]
    tad u hovaca brahmanah –
    krsno vai paramam daivatam
    govindan mrtyur bibheti
    gopijanavallabha-jnanena taj jnatam bhavati
    svahayedam samsarati
    Brahma replied to them: “Krishna is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Death fears Govinda. By understanding Gopijanavallabha everything becomes known. By pronouncing the word “svaha” the Personality of Godhead created the world.[Gopal Tapani Upanishad 1.3]
    krishnam tam vipra bahuda yajanti
    govindam santam bahudharadhyanti gopijanavallabho bhuvanani dadhre svahashrito jagad ejayat suretah
    Many brahmanas worship Krishna. Many worship eternal Govinda. Gopijanavallabha maintains the worlds. Powerful Svaha moves the universe.[Gopal Tapani Upanishad 1.15]
    etasyaiva yajanena candra-dhvajo gata-mohatmanam vedayitva omkarantaralikam manum avarttayan sanga-rahito’bhyapa tat
    By worshipping Him, Siva became free from illusion, and by chanting this mantra in a solitary place, he attained the Lord.[Gopal Tapani Upanishad1.31]
    Hari-vamsa, Lord Siva explains the meaning of the name Kesava:
    iso’ham sarva-dehinam
    avam tavanga-sambhutav
    atah kesava-namabhag
    “Both Brahma (ka) and I (isa), the master of all living entities, were born from You, and for this reason, O Lord, You are known as Kesava.”
    tasmat krishna eva paro devas tam dhyayet tam raset tam bhajet tam yajed ity om tat sad iti
    Therefore, Krishna is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. One should meditate upon Him, glorify Him, serve Him and worship Him. Om tat sat.[Gopal Tapani Upanishad 1.54]
    yo gopan jivan vai atmatvenasrsti-paryantam alati sa gopalo bhavati om tat sat so’ham param brahma krishnatmako nityanandaika-rupah so’ham om //
    Because since the beginning of creation He lovingly protects (alati) the conditioned souls (gopa), He is known as Gopala. Om tat sat. I am a spirit. I am a part-and-parcel of Krishna. My spiritual form is eternally full of bliss. Om.[Gopal Tapani Upanishad 2.50]
    gopalo’ham ajo nityah
    pradyumno’ha sanatanah
    ramo’ham aniruddho’ham
    atmanam arcayed budhah
    I am unborn, eternal Gopala. I am eternal Pradyumna. I am Rama. I am Aniruddha. He who is intelligent worships Me.[Gopal Tapani Upanishad 2.60]
    yena suryagni-vak-candram
    tejasa sva-svarupina
    vartate kaustubhakhyam hi
    manim vadantisa-maninah
    Aware of My supremacy, the sages declare that the splendor of the sun, moon, fire, and eloquent speech has come from My glittering Kaustubha jewel.[Gopal Tapani Upanishad 2.83]
    Also read Purusha Suktam it clearly declares the Supremacy of Narayan.
    Apart from this Krishna has already declared in the Bhagavad Gita:
    BG 15.18: Because I am transcendental, beyond both the fallible and the infallible, and because I am the greatest, I am celebrated both in the world and in the Vedas as that Supreme Person.
    BG 15.15: I am seated in everyone’s heart, and from Me come remembrance, knowledge and forgetfulness.By all the Vedas, I am to be known. Indeed, I am the compiler of Vedānta, and I am the knower of the Vedas.
    Mahabharata, Shanti Parva (12.328.5 onwards, dialogue between Lord Krsna and Arjuna):
    brAhme rAtrikSaye prApte tasya hy amitatejasaH
    prasAdAtprAdurabhavat padmaM padmanibhekSaNa
    tatra brahmA samabhavat sa tasyaiva prasAdajaH
    In the brAhma muhUrta, at the end of the night, due to the mercy of the extremely brilliant Lord, a lotus emerged from His navel and in that lotus, Brahma was born, ofcourse, due to His grace.
    ahnaH kSaye lalAtAchcha suto devasya vai tathA
    krodhAviSTasya saGjaGYe rudraH saMhAra kArakaH
    etau dvau vibudhashreSThau prasAdakrodhajau smRtau
    At the end of the day, the Lord [present as antaryAmi of Brahma *] created Rudra out of krodha-guna, to enable him to be the ‘samhara-karta’. Thus, these two ‘fine-among-wise’, Brahma and Rudra, are known to have been born out of grace and anger respectively.
    * This interpretation is necessary because in the later sections of Moksadharma, Brahma addresses Rudra as a son.
    tadAdeSita panthAnau sRSTi saMhAra kArakau
    nimitta mAtraM tAvatra sarvaprAni varapradau
    Thus, they carry out the instructed tasks of creation and destruction. However, they, the givers of boons to all the creatures, are just the agents.
    kapardI jatilo mundaH zmazAna gRhas evakaH
    ugravrata dharo rudro yogI tripura dAruNaH
    dakSa kratu haraz caiva bhaga netra haras tathA
    [Rudra has] braided hair with knot of an ascetic and rest of the head bald. He dwells in the home of graveyard, steadfast on vigorous penance as a yogi. He is ferocious to Tripurasuras, destroyed Daksayajna and took away the eyes of Bhaga.
    nArAyaNAtmako jJeyaH pANDaveya yuge yuge
    O Arjuna, know that in every yuga, Rudra is ‘nArAyaNAtmaka’. (This phrase means: one whose indweller is Narayana, one who is always immersed in Narayana.)
    tasmin hi pUjyamAne vai devadeve mahezvare
    sampUjito bhavetpArtha devo nArAyaNaH prabhuH
    It is the Lord, the prabhu, the Narayana *IN* Maheshvara (the worshipable, the lord of the devas), who is actually worshiped.
    aham AtmA hi lokAnAM viSvAnAM pANDu nandana
    tasmAd AtmAnam evAgre rudraM sampUjayAmy aham
    yadyahaM nArcayeyaM vai IzAnaM varadaM zivam
    AtmAnaM nArcayet kazcid iti me bhAvitaM manaH
    O son of Pandu, I am, indeed, the Atma, the indweller of this universe and the worlds. Therefore, I worship myself first, even when I worship Rudra. If I did not worship Rudra, the bestower of boons, in such a way i.e… worshiping the indwelling Lord first some would not worship Me, the indwelling Lord, at all – this is my opinion.
    mayA pramANaM hi kRtaM lokaH samanuvartate
    pramAnAni hi pUjyAni tatastaM pUjayAmyaham
    Whatever I follow and give due worth as a pramaNa, the world follows that. Such pramanas have to be duly followed; therefore I follow them.
    yastaM vetti sa mAM vetti yo anu taM sa hi mAm anu
    rudro nArAyaNaz caiva sattvam ekaM dvidhA kRtam
    loke carati kaunteya vyakti sthaM sarva karmasu
    Whoever knows him, knows Me. Whoever follows him, follows Me. (Though) the world, in all its actions, worships two gods, Rudra and Narayana, it is actually one only who is worshiped.
    na hi me kenacid deyo varaH pANDava nandana
    iti saJcintya manasA purANaM vizvam Izvaram
    putrArthaM ArAdhitavAn AtmAnaM aham AtmanA
    O Son of Pandu, there is, of course, nobody who can grant Me boons. Knowing that well, I worhip Myself, Who am the beginningless and universal power, known as Sarveshvara, for the sake of getting sons.
    na hi viSNuH pranamati kasmai cidvibudhAya tu
    Rta AtmAnam eveti tato rudraM bhajAmy aham
    Indeed Vishnu does not bow to any one and [even when He bows he bows to Himself], for what sake, but for the sake of showing the path to the wise. Therefore, it is the truth that I worship myself even when I worship Rudra.

    Like

  15. And ma’am Nilalohita,
    I had visited your blog and I must say that it doesn’t refute the philosophies of Ramanuja or Madhva in any way! Plus since you donot accept the Vaishnava interpretaion and claim it to only be an interpretation. How can I accept yours? You have quoted only the so-called upanishads that have not been quoted by scholars b4 the 16th century. Many of these so called upanishads contradict the samhitas,brahmanas,aranyakas and the authentic upanishads. Furthermore, even Shankaracharya doesnot quote from these. Also you should know that except the 10 principle Upanishads and some other,many are heavily interpolated ,with lost parts, etc. In this case, one should only accept those verses that the ancient veda bhashyakaras have quoted. The truth is that the various names of the gods described in the vedas belong to only one Supreme God,the Brahman, who is also called Vishnu. The proof is present in the shastras:
    Rig veda:
    Yo devanam namadhe eka eva
    Vishnu alone bears the names of all other gods and that He alone is the Supreme God worshipped by all these names

    Bhalvaveya-sruti :
    namani visvani na santi loke yad avirasit purusasya sarvam
    namani sarvani yam avisanti tam vai visnum paramam udaharanti

    “The names of this world are not different from Him. All names in this world are names of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. All names refer to Him, Lord Visnu, Whom the wise declare is the Supreme Personality of Godhead.”

    Vaisampayana Muni explains that all these names are names of Lord Krishna.
    The Skanda Purana also explains:
    sri-narayanadini namani vinanyani rudradibhyo harir dattavan
    (Quoted in the Govinda-bhasya, 4.1.28)

    “Except for Narayana and some other names, Lord Hari gave away His names to Lord Siva and the other demigods.”

    Narayana and some other names are names that belong to Lord Hari alone. Strict grammatical rules laid down by Panini declares this which has been accepted by all vaidikas. Furthermore the recent day sahasranaamas like Siva and Lalita Sahasranaamas donot contain such an important name like Narayana,used extensively in the upanishads. But Vishnu Sahasranama, documented even by Charaka(born,300 BC),the great knower of Ayurveda has accepted its greatness in the Charaka Samhita.

    You said that the Vishnu Sahasranama doesnot contain the names Pashupati and Asani. i’d like to tell you that Gaudiya vaishnavas of Bengal while chanting Sri Krishna ashtottara shatanama of Brahmanda purana in Bengali, conclude by repeating,”KRISHNERA ***ANANTA*** NAANA MAHIMAA APAAR! ” which means Krishna has endless and unlimited names which have endless glories. Among his endless names, Asani and Pashupati are also important names. Since Bhallaveya sruti declares all names to be Visnu’s only, there is no problem in it.

    The authors of the Narayanastra blog are brahmins as they themselves revealed and if you believe in ur aryan invasion theory you should know that it also says that Brahmins of the south are of Aryan descent. And I think u dont know this that that theory has been debunked years ago and scientists have called it “PSEUDO-HITLERIAN THEORY”. Vivekananda himself declared this theory to be false in one of his lectures and you claim to be the follower of Ramkrishna,his guru whose pics u used in ur blog.

    Lord Shiva and Mother Parvati will always be my guru and guru-mata. May they shower their blessings on us vaishnavas and mae us fit to serve the feet of Sri Sri Radha Govinda.

    May God bless you!

    Like

  16. @ Nilalohitaji,
    And one more thing, Srimad Bhagavatam ,the amala purana is accepted by all vaidikas including traditional followers of Advaita. It never contradicts the vedas or aythentic part of itihasas.he difference between the descriptions in the mahabharata and sb can be because of several reasons. As all Vaidikas even ancients affirm that this Mahabharata is a highly interpolated text and even at times veda virodha. But such is not the case with SB. Also these differences can also be due to the occurence of the same events during different kalpas. Many such examples of difference due to kalpa are found in vaidik shastras. And what you said about Shiva being undefeated in Rig Veda is actually about Vishnu,mostly in the form of Lord Shankarshana who is being praised as Rudra/Shiva. All suktams found in the Vedas are dedicated only to Lord Vishnu or Goddess Sri in one form or the other.

    Like

    • Sarva nama kevala Hari nama… Sankarshana is Lord Balrama / Sheh naga / Ananta and not Lord Shiva.

      Mahabharat is not Veda virodha except where people have tried to interpret it with their own stupid intellect. Original Mahabharata text also does not contradict SB… This is Nilalohitaji stupidity… She has been purposefully spreading rumors. She has a habit of doing this. I have answered her in detail for all her question not even once quoting SB but showing her what ever SB has said is acknowledged by all.

      The only difference about SB and Mahabharata is that SB as per Veda Vyas own admission is the esoteric knowledge of The Supreme Personality of GodHead Krishna. It was written by Veda Vyas so that the supreme knowledge could be written about and told to the world. It was written for the highly intellectual ones for the very high ranking Brahmanas with superior intellect where as Mahabharata was written for the general masses so that they could understand and know about Krishna.

      Always remember that people like Nilalohita are hell bent upon confusing you since they themselves are confused beyond redemption. In this birth of their’s it is not possible for them to understand the Supreme Truth Krishna no matter how much we want or try. Only if Krishna kripa happens only then can she know about Krishna. Knowing about Krishna is ati durlabham.

      We know Uddhav himself a knower of Vedas couldn’t understand or recognise Krishna until Krishna himself decided to be kind to him and take away his ignorance then what can we talk about people like us and Nilalohita.

      All you should tell her is what adi guru Shankaracharya himself told the whole world in the end, which is… Bhaj Govindam Bhaj Govindam Bhaj Govindam ” Murdh Mate “…

      Like

    • Well, well. I didn’t knew that the very foundation of Vaishnavism is so weak that it would require four men to face a solitary woman. First Admin@Narayanastra Blog and his boyfriend Humble Bhagawata Bandhu, and now you and your mate rishiexcess. I get the same feeling Kali Ma would have had when Raktabija’s clones surrounded her. I block him, and later you and your friend bump into me, this cannot be sheer coincidence. Well, you mentioned the names Narayana, Vishnu and Vasudeva and you also claim to have visited my blog. So I don’t think I need to repeat all again that Narayana & Vishnu are Kali Ma’s names and Vasudeva refers to Lord Shiva. And as far as commentary of Acharyaji is concerned, I told the same thing to your boss (Narayanastra), and I am telling you as well- I study the commentaries by different great leaders, and then write my own commentary. And BTW Acharyaji mentioned the word “Pancharatra”, I admit. But what proof do you or any of your associates have that “Pancharatra” here refers to Vaishnava Tantras and not the five night long Yagna that Sage Narayana had performed?

      Good question. If I don’t accept Vaishnava interpretation, then why should you accept mine. Well, I give you three good reasons:
      1) What I wrote is not “Interpretation”, but constant ultimate truth which one can also call revealation.
      2) I am a Suryavanshi from my father’s side, and thus honorbound to speak what is truth, no matter how horrific it is. Doubting me is a trial in vain.
      3) The truth I revealed is scientific and when time comes to defend ourselves from the Abrahamic barbarians, it would be the truth revealed by me that would save you, not love.
      BTW do you have slightest idea that Vedas have been penned down into 4 sections, 1,130 Samhitas, 1,130 Brahmanas, 1,130 Aranyakas, and 1,130 Upanisads? This makes a total of 4,520 divisions. At present, most of these texts have disappeared due to the influence of time. We can only find 11 Samhitas, 18 Brahmanas, 7 Aranyakas and 220 Upanisads which constitutes a mere 6% of the entire Vedic canon. So can we afford rejecting any of the present Upanishads only because we don’t like the content present in them? And for your kind information, I am a Bengli Vaidika Brahmin from my mother’s side and I have seen with my own eyes the Upanishads which I quoted and mind you, these manuscripts date back to BCs. So try to decieve someone else. All those who qouted the “so-called” Upanishads of yours, were correct. There are no interpolations in any of Shruti texts and this is another truth that my historian relative revealed to me. BTW your “ancient bhasyakars” don’t quote Brahma Samhita as well. But does that stop you from accepting it?  And will you be bit more specific about the verse no. That you quote? Since you mention Vishnu Sahasranama here, know that we Shaktashaivites revere it as well, unlike Vaishnavas who sully their souls with the sin of blaspheming Lord Shiva’s name. But unfortunate for you, I didn’t see any commentary of Vishnu Sahasranama mentioning the names Pashupati and Asani. Well sweetheart, copying “grammatical” points from Narayanastra blog and actually knowing grammar are two different things. I know that people like Shakesphere’s Romeo & Juliet more than Newton’s laws of motion, but my dear, world is governed by Newton’s laws. Absence of Romeo & Juliet won’t be a big deal, but absence of Newton’s laws would be a chaotic situation. So Worship Govinda, o foolish Vaishnava. Your pety grammatical rules will not save you from hell.

      Now look mister, I really don’t think Bhagavatam is all bogus, but yes, authenticity of its historical and phillosophical parts are doubtful as they contradict the true meanings of Vedas and Mahabharata. But the scientific parts which are in sync with science, I welcome them. BTW what proof do you have that Mahabharata is interpolated? Lastly, the deity of Vedas can never be Lakshmi-Narayana because unlike Shiva-Kali, they are never in any Purana or other script described as androgynous sharing a common body. Bhalo hobe jyodi apni Veda charcha amar opore chhede didi ke support koren ar cpi m er biruddhe chokranto korte nijer mogoj jog din. Bhaja Govindam Bhaja Govindam, Govindam Bhaja Mudhmate.

      Like

      • So what if the names pashupati and asani are not mentioned in the vishnu Sahara nama? The Sahara name consists of only 1000 names but Vishnu has unlimited names. As the vedas declare that all names are his and the devas are named after him only. The commentaries on Vishnu Sahasra nama explains the names which are mentioned in it.

        Like

      • bla bla bla shiva devotees are demons ravana, hiranyakashyap, hiranyaksha, kumbhakarna jarasanda all these demons are shiva devotees but lord vishnu took birth and he killed all these demons we are living in earth because of vishnu in varaha avatar vishnu killed hiranyaksha and he saved the earth jarasanda is shiva devotee bhima is vishnu devotee bhima killed jarasanda your shiva failed to save his devotees shiva devotees are demons all these demons are more dangerous than pakistan terrorist lashkar e toiba

        Like

  17. Dear rishiexecs sir,
    Shankarshana is the ishta devata of Shiva as per Bhagavatam,Garuda puran and vishnu puran.It is he who carries all the names of Rudra.For example, Shiva is called trayambaka(three-eyed) because Narasimha (Shankarshana himself) is three eyed(according to Narasimha Tapani Upanishad,narasimhadeva has surya,chandra and agni as his three eyes), he is also called Rudra,Ishana,Pashupati for the same reason. The following establish Narasimha as sakshat Shankarshana:
    The vishnu purana describes Narasimha as SankarshanAmsam. The Vishnu DharmOttara purAnA explicitly identifies Narasimha as Sankarshana by saying Haris sankarshanaamsena narasimha-vapur-dharah and also says that Narasimha destroys ignorance, sankarshanaatmaa bhagavaan ajnaanasya vinaasanah. Obviously, the gunams of Sankarshana are balam and jnAnam. This was exhibited by Narasimha to destroy Hiranyakasipu and fulfil the desire of prahlada by understanding the latter’s needs respectively.
    And as i said before one of the principal teachings of Gaudiya Vaishnavism in interpreting the vedas is to identify all the names as that of Krishna alone.Names like Indra,prana,Vayu,Hiranyagarbha,Prajapati,Agni,Brahman,Purusha etc. are all his names alone according to Govinda Bhashyam.
    The relevant pramanas o this matter are:
    Rig veda:
    Yo devanam namadhe eka eva
    “Vishnu alone bears the names of all other gods and that He alone is the Supreme God worshipped by all these names.”

    Bhalvaveya-sruti :
    namani visvani na santi loke yad avirasit purusasya sarvam
    namani sarvani yam avisanti tam vai visnum paramam udaharanti

    “The names of this world are not different from Him. All names in this world are names of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. All names refer to Him, Lord Visnu, Whom the wise declare is the Supreme Personality of Godhead.”

    The Skanda Purana also explains:
    sri-narayanadini namani vinanyani rudradibhyo harir dattavan
    (Quoted in the Govinda-bhasya, 4.1.28)

    “Except for Narayana and some other names, Lord Hari gave away His names to Lord Siva and the other demigods.”

    PRAMANA from Mahabharata Shanti Parva (credit goes to Sri Krishna Kadiri for pointing out this to us. He is a learned contributor to the dvaita list at http://dvaita.info/mailman/listinfo/dvaita-list_dvaita.info)
    Arjuna uvAcha:

    vedeSu sapurANeSu yAni guhyAni karmabhiH
    teSAM niruktaM tvatto.ahaM zrotum icchAmi kezava
    na hy anyo vartayen nAmnAM niruktaM tvAm Rte prabho

    [O holy one, O Supreme ordainer of the Past and the Future. O Creator of all Beings, O immutable one, O Refuge of all the worlds, O Lord of the universe, O dispeller of the fears of all persons, I desire to hear from thee in detail, O Kesava, the significance of all those names of thine, O God, which have been mentioned by the great Rishis in the Vedas and the Puranas in consequences of diverse acts of thine. None else than thee, O Lord, is competent to explain the significations of those names.]

    Sri Krishna uvAcha:

    Rgvede sayajurvede tathaivAtharvasAmasu | purANe
    sopaniSade tathaiva jyotiSe.arjuna |
    sAMkhye ca yogazAstre ca Ayurvede tathaiva ca | bahUni
    mama nAmAni kIrtitAni maharSibhiH
    gauNAni tatra nAmAni karmajAni ca kAni cit | niruktaM
    karmajAnAM ca zRNuSva prayato.anagha

    [In the Rigveda, in the Yajurveda, in the Atharvans and the Samans, in the Puranas and the Upanishads, as also in the treatises on Astrology, O Arjuna, in the Sankhya scriptures, in the Yoga scriptures, and in the treatises also on the Science of Life, many are the names that have been mentioned by the great Rishis. Some of those names are derivable from my attributes and some of them relate to my acts. Do thou hear, with concentrated attention, O sinless one, what the import is of each off those names (in particular) that have reference to my acts. I shall recite them to you.]

    Pramana #2, occurs in Brahma Purana, quoted by Madhva in his Brahma Sutra Bhashya at 1.3.3 (courtesy: http://fiindolo.sub.uni-goettingen.de/gretil/1_sanskr/6_sastra/3_phil/vedanta/bbdip13u.htm)

    caturmukhaśśatānando brahmaṇaḥ padmabhūriti /
    ugro bhasmadharo nagnaḥ kapālīti śivasya ca /
    viśeṣanāmāni dadau svakīyānyapi keśavaḥ //
    iti ca brāhme
    Translation:
    Kesava has given special names, which are also his names, to Brahma as caturmukhaH, shatAnandaH, and padmabhUH, and to Siva, the names such as ugraH, bhasmadharaH, nagnaH, and kapAlI.

    Pramana #3, occurs in Brahmanda Purana, quoted by Madhva in his Brahma Sutra Bhashya at 1.3.3 (courtesy: http://fiindolo.sub.uni-goettingen.de/gretil/1_sanskr/6_sastra/3_phil/vedanta/bbdip13u.htm)
    brahmāṇḍe ca –
    rujaṃ drāvayate yasmādrudrastasmājjanārdanarḥ /
    iśānādeva ceśāno mahādevo mahattvataḥ //
    pibanti ye narā nākaṃ muktāssaṃsārasāgarāt /
    tadādhāro yato viṣṇuḥ pinākīti tataḥ smṛtaḥ //
    śivaḥ sukhātmakatvena śarvaḥ śaṃrodhanāddhariḥ /
    kṛtyātmakamimaṃ dehaṃ yato vaste pravartayan //
    kṛttivāsāstato devo viriñcaśca virecanāt /
    bṛṃhaṇādbrahmanāmāsāvaiśvaryādindra ucyate //

    Translation by Prof. Pandurangi:

    Janardana (i.e., the redeemer, Vishnu) is called Rudra; for He cures the disease (of life).
    He is Ishana (the ruler) for He rules the lords of the world;
    He is Mahadeva; for He is great and splendid;
    He is known as Pinakin; for those that have crossed the sea of life and obtained release, take their stand on Him and drink in pure pleasure.
    He is Siva, for, He is absolutely blissful.
    Hari is Sarva, for He closes (the gates of) happiness against (the wicked).
    The Lord is called Krittivasa, for He shelters or dwells in the body covered over with skin, to guide it in life.
    He is called Virincha; for He produces the world out of Himself;
    He is Brahma, for He is perfect and He is Indra (the wealthy), for He is the sole Lord .

    Thus all names ae is. All sounds denote him alone.

    Like

    • Sarva nama kevala Hari nama: What you have written is excellent knowledge and there can be no dispute in that. What I was saying is that Lord Balarama is Sankarsana. Lord Balarama is none other than Lord Krishna’s own plenary expansion as Sankarsana who Lord Shiva meditates upon all the time.

      What you have written is exactly what I wrote long before. If you read my answers to people here you would i am sure come to know. Please keep writing about such beautiful, transcendental Supreme Knowledge as it will help spread it and remove ignorance.

      Hare Krishna

      Rishi

      Like

  18. Attributing all names to him is correct because of the presence of the following shastric pramanas:
    The Gopala-tapani Upanisad confirms :

    yo ‘sau sarvair vedair giyate

    “All the Vedas proclaim the glories of the Supreme Personality of Godhead.”

    And the Katha Upanisad (1.2.15) also confirms it:

    sarve veda yat-padam amananti tapamsi sarvani ca yad vadanti

    “All the Vedas worship the Supreme Lord’s lotus feet, and all austerities proclaim His glories.”

    And in the Hari-vamsa it is affirmed:

    vede ramayane caiva purane bharate tatha
    adav ante ca madhye ca harih sarvatra giyate

    “In the Vedic literature, including the Ramayana, Puranas ad Mahabharata, from the very beginning (adau), to the end (ante ca), as well as within the middle (madhye ca), only Hari, the supreme Personality of Godhead, Lord Hari is explained.”

    This is an established gaudiya siddhanta in the Govinda Bhashyam in the link below:
    http://www.harekrsna.com/sun/editorials/11-07/editorials2195.htm

    Like

  19. This she-moron Nilalohita does not have even a shred of knowledge of the scriptures.

    // And BTW Acharyaji mentioned the word “Pancharatra”, I admit. But what proof do you or any of your associates have that “Pancharatra” here refers to Vaishnava Tantras and not the five night long Yagna that Sage Narayana had performed? //

    This really shows her ignorance of Shankaracharya (who she likes to respectfully call “Acharyaji”) and his works. Shankaracharya mentions pAncharAtra in the pAncharAtra-adhikaraNa of Brahma Sutras, and says that he disagrees with some philosophical aspects of it. He calls the pAncharAtrikas as “bhAgavatas” and “pAncharAtra siddhAntIs”, and says that they worship Lord Vasudeva/Narayana as supreme. This obviously refers to the Vaishnava tantra, since there are none who are called “bhAgavatas” and “pAncharAtra siddhAntIs” anywhere in history other than Vaishnavas. See Heliodorus’ (the Vaishnava from Greece) inscription in the iron pillar dating 113 BC:

    “Devadevasa Va [sude]vasa Garudadhvajo ayam
    karito i[a] Heliodorena bhaga-
    vatena Diyasa putrena Takhasilakena
    Yonadatena agatena maharajasa
    Amtalikitasa upa[m]ta samkasam-rano
    Kasiput[r]asa [Bh]agabhadrasa tratarasa
    vasena [chatu]dasena rajena vadhamanasa”

    — Original inscription

    See the epithets “garuDadhvajaH” “vAsudevasya” “bhAgavatena Heliodorena” Also see further explanation here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heliodorus_pillar

    And what does Shankara say about the bhAgavatas of pAncarAtra? See here… (I had posted this info in Sanskrit on my blog, but since Nilalohita has zero knowledge of Sanskrit, Veda, or Shastras, she did not understand it as we expect)

    “-It is true, we reply, that a part of the system which we are going to discuss agrees with the Vedânta system, and hence affords no matter for controversy…”

    “Bhâgavatas are of opinion that the one holy (bhagavat) Vâsudeva, whose nature is pure knowledge, is what really exists, and that he, dividing himself fourfold, appears in four forms (vyûha), as Vâsudeva, Sankarshana, Pradyumna, and Aniruddha. Vâsudeva denotes the highest Self, Sankarshana the individual soul, Pradyumna the mind (manas), Aniruddha the principle of egoity (ahankâra). Of these four Vâsudeva constitutes the ultimate causal essence, of which the three others are the effects.–The believer after having worshipped Vâsudeva for a hundred years by means of approach to the temple (abhigamana), procuring of things to be offered (upâdâna), oblation (îgyâ), recitation of prayers, &c. (svâdhyâya), and devout meditation (yoga), passes beyond all affliction and reaches the highest Being.”

    Who, other than Vaishnavas talk about four vyUhas?

    And what does Shankaracharya say about these Vaishnavas?

    “Concerning this system we remark that we do not intend to controvert the doctrine that Nârâyana, who is higher than the Undeveloped, who is the highest Self, and the Self of all, reveals himself by dividing himself in multiple ways; for various scriptural passages, such as ‘He is onefold, he is threefold’ (Kh. Up. VII, 26, 2)’, teach us that the highest Self appears in manifold forms. Nor do we mean to object to the inculcation of unceasing concentration of mind on the highest Being which appears in the Bhâgavata doctrine under the forms of reverential approach, &c.; for that we are to meditate on the Lord we know full well from Smriti and Scripture.”

    Now, one can see clearly what Shankaracharya means by nArAyaNa and vAsudeva. So much for the theory that nArAyaNa/viShNu is pArvatI and vAsudeva is Shiva according to Shankaracharya.

    Clearly, this Nilalohita has sub-zero knowledge in these matters.

    Like

  20. And Nilalohita is so deluded that she is incapable of noticing that Shankaracharya (“AchArya ji” according to her) condemns Shakti worship:

    Gita Bhashya 9.25:

    भूतानि विनायकमातृगणचतुर्भगिन्यादीनि यान्ति भूतेज्याः भूतानां पूजकाः। यान्ति मद्याजिनः मद्यजनशीलाः वैष्णवाः मामेव यान्ति। समाने अपि आयासे मामेव न भजन्ते अज्ञानात्, तेन ते अल्पफलभाजः भवन्ति इत्यर्थः।। न केवलं मद्भक्तानाम् अनावृत्तिलक्षणम् अनन्तफलम्, सुखाराधनश्च अहम्।

    Translation: Those who worship the bhUtagaNas such as Vinayaka, Matru-Ganas, and Chatur bhaginis attain these bhUtagaNas. Such results are temporary and they return to samsAra. Those who worship me, the vaiShNavas attain Me, attaining endless result, and they do not enter the cycle of rebirth and death. Even though the amount of exertion is the same, the devotees of other demigods attain limited results. Not only do My devotees attain the infinite fruit of non-return to samsAra, but also the means of worshiping Me is very easy.

    Gita Bhashya 17.4:

    प्रेतान् भूतगणांश्च सप्तमातृकादींश्च अन्ये यजन्ते तामसाः जनाः

    Translation: Those whose nature is tAmasic (mode of ignorance), they worship the pretas (spirits of the dead), bhUtagaNas, and the sapta-mAtrikas.

    And Shankaracharya considers Shaiva Agamas, let alone shAkta ones as non-Vedic:

    sā ceyaṃ vedabāhyeśvarakalpanānekaprakārā | kecittāvatsāṃkhyayogavyapāśrayāḥ kalpayanti pradhānapuruṣayoradhiṣṭhātā kevalaṃ nimittakāraṇamīśvara itaretaravilakṣaṇāḥ pradhānapuruṣeśvarā iti | māheśvarāstu manyante kāryakāraṇayogavidhiduḥkhāntāḥ pañca padārthāḥ paśupatineśvareṇa paśupāśavimokṣaṇāyopadiṣṭāḥ paśupatirīśvaro nimittakāraṇamiti varṇayanti ||

    Translation: “The theories about the Lord which are independent of the Vedânta are of various nature….The Mâhesvaras (Saivas) maintain that the five categories, viz. effect, cause, union, ritual, the end of pain, were taught by the Lord Pasupati (Siva) to the end of breaking the bonds of the animal (i.e. the soul); Pasupati is, according to them, the Lord, the operative cause.”

    Note that Shankara does not say here, unlike Pancharatra Adhikarana, that he makes an exception to the devotional worship of Shiva taught by the Shaivas. He condemns the whole system as non-Vedic (veda-bAhya).

    I am sure this uncouth* she-idiot Nilalohita will now come up with some fantastical and absurd explanation for all these statements of Shankaracharya. But let the others know the truth from what I have written.

    * (uses uncultured terminology like “boyfriend” etc. You can see more in the comments of her second recent entry in her blog, which deserves to be blocked and censored)

    Like

  21. @Nilalohitaji,
    “Good question. If I don’t accept Vaishnava interpretation, then why should you accept mine. Well, I give you three good reasons:
    1) What I wrote is not “Interpretation”, but constant ultimate truth which one can also call revealation.
    2) I am a Suryavanshi from my father’s side, and thus honorbound to speak what is truth, no matter how horrific it is. Doubting me is a trial in vain.
    3) The truth I revealed is scientific and when time comes to defend ourselves from the Abrahamic barbarians, it would be the truth revealed by me that would save you, not love.”

    Well well ma’am,
    Answer to your point 1) Yes yours is an interpretation. Forcefully clinging to misinterpretations and falsity doesnot make it the absolute truth. The Saivite interpretation is much flawed as revealed by Srimad Shankaracharya Bhagavatpada in the Shariraka Bhashya on Vedanta sutra, his Gita Bhashya and other texts. Well vedas is not only about material science,time,space of this material universe which you ramble so much about but it consists of knowledge about God, who is beyond the modes of matter and who is transcendental. Our interpretation is in harmony with the Veda and the authentic acharyas and we don’t have to quote from spurious texts calling themselves shrutis.

    Answer to your point 2) We didn’t ask your lineage and so there is no point giving such vague comments in trying to prove your imagination truth. You might be from that lineage but you are not Sri Ramachandra,the epitome of knowledge and character. Your comments and your replies to other Vaishnavas in your blog tell the contrary worse than mlecchas! Since you said your mother is Brahmin and your father is kshatriya, marriage between them is pratiloma varna sankara which is forbidden in Vedic dharma shastras under normal circumstances, which berefts you from the piousness of both these families hence I guess you have such heinous and unrespectful nature. P.S. I am not a castist and don’t believe in caste system by birth.

    Answer to your point 3) Quite a vague comment. I have myself debated and my fellow Vaishnavas too have debated with Abrahamics,especially uncouth islamic fundamentalists who couldnot take up the weight of veda shastra or even itihasa and purana and i didn’t since that time seen them hovering near us and we had successfully established Lakshmi-Narayana as the Supreme Brahman.

    And your comment on Lakshmi-Narayana(Radha-Krishna) not being the supreme tattva is quite bogus. Severeal agamic as well as few puranic scriptures laud Hari as VAIKUNTHA KAMALAJA, half Lakshmi and half Vishnu form of Narayana.The Vedas laud Hari and Sri as the supreme tattva beyond doubt. The Vishnu purana calls Lakshmi as Anapayini, the one never separate from the Lord.Your scriptures don’t even call Shiva or Parvati by the name of Narayana anywhere.You might quote a sole verse from Kurma Purana to support your stance but even that doesnot make Narayana sakshat shakti or prakriti. This is because in the Vedas,to yopur utter surprise, Narayana is Adi Purusha, the purusha tattva of Brahman not prakriti. This is the evidence from Narayana Upanishad of Atharva Veda:
    Om atha purusho ha vai nanraayano kaamayata prajaah srjeyeti
    Translation- Then the supreme purusha, Narayana desired to create.
    Thus your interpretation that Narayana is Kali/Shakti/Prakriti is debunked by Vedas themselves.

    One more point: you said that the foundation of Vaishnavism is weak because 4 people are proving u wrong. Being Male and female is material.You should identify yourself as atma, which is neither male nor female. You gave us the situation of Kali and Raktabija. But Mother Kali is not the one who gives false meanings to the Vedas and spreading adharma like you. Brahma Samhita is an ancient pancharatric text that was long lost but was partly discovered in the form of its fifth chapter by Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu in the library of Sri Adikeshava Devasthana(temple) at Thiruvattur in Kerala when he happened to visit the temple during his teertha yatra.It has been quoted in many places by our acharyas and it is authentic as it is in accordance with the Vedas,Srimad Bhagavatam, Gita and other Pancharatric texts.

    Like

    • (“So what if the names pashupati and asani are not mentioned in the vishnu Sahara nama? The Sahara name consists of only 1000 names but Vishnu has unlimited names. As the vedas declare that all names are his and the devas are named after him only. The commentaries on Vishnu Sahasra nama explains the names which are mentioned in it.”)

      Debunk, debunk, debunk. So mister, by how many names are you known by, with two of your names being JUSTTRANSCEND and Haridham? My friend told me about you. And what are the unlimited names? And ‘Sahara nama’! You cannot even spell Sahasra Nama properly and you are constantly lecturing me about some fictious ‘Vishnu Tattva’ mumbo-jumbo. BTW homosexuality is also forbidden in Vedas. But surprisingly we see that highest no. of Hindu homosexuals are Vaishnavas, especially from Gaudiya Sampradaya. So sweetheart, before commenting about my parents, better take a look at yourself :). Well, I guess that psychopath “Narayanastra authors” would have told you to say so. So tell that chicken that even incest is a taboo in Sanatan Dharma but we see that South Indians commit this nasty act by marrying their own siblings, cousins, uncle or aunts. So it would be really nice of him if keeps that filthy mouth of his shut regarding inter caste marriage when his own character is a matter of controversy :).
      “Severeal agamic as well as few puranic scriptures laud Hari as VAIKUNTHA KAMALAJA, half Lakshmi and half Vishnu form of Narayana.”
      You know, at the beginning, I used to laugh at you guys. But now I pity you. Vaikuntha Kamalaja is an iconography inspired by Ardhanarishvara and makes its first appearance in 11th century. Moreover, Vaikuntha Kamalaja is a regional deity restricted to Kashmir and Nepal. Proof? We don’t see temples dedicated to this deity in Indian plains.

      “Well vedas is not only about material science,time,space of this material universe which you ramble so much about but it consists of knowledge about God, who is beyond the modes of matter and who is transcendental.”
      You know, at the beginning, I used to laugh at you guys. But now I pity you. I pity you that the act of your parents sending you to school has gone in vain. I know that next you will narrate some cock & bull fairy tale about some fictional “Spiritual” world, making Lord Krishna a tyrant alien residing in some fictional extraterrestrial planet “Goloka” and “Vaikuntha”. But the question is, where is the proof that these really exist? Mind you, even though Shakespeare’s Romeo & Juliet is more tempting than Newton’s Laws of motion, but the harsh truth is that world is governed by the principles of Newton’s Laws and not some fairy tale by an English bard.

      One more thing, I don’t quote Puranas as there might be chances of interpolation. But since you are so much into your own fool’s paradise, then let’s see what Shrutis say regarding this:
      “shuunya.n tatprakR^itirmaayaa brahmavij~naanamityapi |
      shivaH purushha iishaano nityamaatmeti kathyate |” (Maha Upanishad VI:61)
      “That Brahman has been (identified with) emptiness, Prakriti, Maya and also consciousness. It has also been said to be “Shiva – Purusha, Eshana, the eternal and the self (Atman)””.

      See, Brahman is identified as Prakriti and Maya besides Purusha. So, the verse “Om atha purusho ha vai nanraayano kaamayata prajaah srjeyeti” is correct, but your limited understanding is faulty. As far as Maha Upanishad is concerned, this can be explained through a simple Mathematical reasoning. If Brahman = Purusha and Brahman = Prakriti/Maya as well, then Purusha = Prakriti/Maya because if A = B & B = C, then that means A = C as well.

      “you said that the foundation of Vaishnavism is weak because 4 people are proving u wrong.”

      Of course it is. And why not, when it is based on so many superstitions and cock & bull fairy tales instead of science! Take my advice, save your bedtime stories for knee-highs. But I doubt, even knee-highs will spit on your face and hit your face with their slippers if you bark nonsense in front of them. 🙂
      (“But Mother Kali is not the one who gives false meanings to the Vedas and spreading adharma like you.”)

      Since when Kali Ma become a Mother Goddess to you Vaishnavas, who describe her as a ghastly deity who loves bloodshed and compare her and Lord Shiva’s relationship with a sex-worker? Okay, leave that, I ask you a simple question. What is the colour of leaf?
      “Brahma Samhita is an ancient pancharatric text”

      When did I say that it is not a Pancharatric text? BTW I have never seen any Vaishnava showing any regard for Tantric writings. So it would be better if you don’t ask me to respect Pancharatric writings either, for nothing comes for free. A small transaction is required. If you expect respect out of others, you must be respectful as well.

      “it is in accordance with the Vedas,”

      There is a limit of lying, and you are crossing all limits. After containing so many superstitions it cannot be in sync with Vedas, the pinnacle of scientific reasoning.

      BTW tell your boss that I have called him by the names that rightfully belong to him and describe his characters. He is a swine, and by calling him that is no criminal offence. That’s what he really is and I have no regrets regarding that.

      Like

      • @ Mahakali… Nilalohita… etc…

        One thing is settled, you are an upstart and a foolish person to discuss with on such issues. Now lets deal with you in the language, you best seem to understand.

        How many names do you have? You seem to hold quite a few yourself and yet don’t fall shy for a second from pointing fingers at others. What I am trying to say is that it shows how hypocritical you are to the very core of your soul. A fact Newton’s Law wouldn’t be able to prove… LOL!!! but yes if one has the intellect to understand the subtleties of Shakespeare’s Romeo & Juliet, one would lets agree know, what I am getting at. Oh Sorry! I almost forgot I am addressing an imbecile prick or a bunch of them together as one here… LOL!

        You seem to have given a whole new meaning to ” all for one and one for all slogan ” … funny now i am quoting from the 3 musketeers and this too is not among Newton’s law, yet a harsh truth that Newton’s laws could be understood through analogies that can be drawn from these literary works but sadly you and your likes are precluded from such possibilities. I know I just said something beyond what your puny little brain can comprehend but hey since when has reasoning ever been under the purview of your dim wits. hahahaha.

        You are not just a fool or a rascal but a conceited and mentally deranged person. After all who in this world would like to correct others of their spelling mistakes and go on to make one while spelling “Fictitious” in the same line where you cheaply endeavor to correct someone else for his typo , Sahasra nam? … Nilalohita or impostor Mahakali or Imbecile!!!… Damn right !! hahahahahahaha.

        You talk about your lineage of being a Surya Vanshi when none either from Surya or Chandra vansh exist today a fact which you should know but you clearly don’t and no I am not willing to delve further into throwing any light on it. After all what’s the point? One can teach a snake, a dog, a pig, a lion or any other animal but clearly not a lowlife like you.

        A person who poses to be someone with scientific inclination and interests when presented with the opportunity to demonstrate her knowledge only has a bogus concocted lineage to come forthwith so as to shamelessly prove herself of dignified decent, and on basis of just her gender & bogus lineage tries to coerce people to believe in her words without offering a shred of proof or evidence on the subject due to, which she makes this plea, is only reflective of her traumatic upbringing and her breeding. LOL!

        When you ran out of your rant and clearly have been crushed and defeated by each and every Vaishnav on this platform individually, who you really are and what you are made up became evident and is on full display here for all to see and access. After reading what all you have written any pious and genuine Shiva or Shakti follower would look at you with only disgust.

        You abused Vaishnavas and basically displayed the extent of your soul’s depravity in doing so. You have used Mata Kali’s name to advance your foolish arguments. Just to score cheap points you went on to even write dirty things about Lord Shiva and Mata Kali and tried to put the onus on Vaishnavas and you call yourself Shiva Shakti bhakta… seriously!… This shows that you actually are a very emotionally abused and distressed person and are in an urgent & serious need of a professional psychiatric help.

        We are not like you. We will not abuse Lord Shiva Or Mata Kali or Mata Parvati for they are the foremost devotees / vaishnavas of Lord Krishna / Lord Vishnu. Yes Vaishnava’s the one’s you called homosexuals… Do you know one of the names of mata Parvati is Vaishnavi ? In your quest to prove yourself superior you have fallen below the most inferior. While others were just having a discourse in order to give you a chance to learn more you turned around and showed your real identity, which can only be of a very crass and cheap family lineage.

        You want to go ahead and abuse me go ahead and do that. You said you pity us… its way better than being you … because from now on you don’t exist. We don’t care to laugh at you or pity you because to us you are no more than trash or filth. Nobody has any feelings towards trash or filth. It only purpose is to be thrown away. In case you didn’t get it let me help you.

        ” GET THE HELL OUT OF THIS FORUM “. Trust me I’ve controlled myself a lot today. It may not be a criminal offence to call some one a swine but it surly is criminal offence to incite communal tension, which you have clearly done by tagging South Indians to be practicing incest and Vaishnavas as homosexual both punishable under law IPC ( Indian Penal Code ) and cyber laws in India for a maximum period of imprisonment. The admin of this page will have your Ip address don’t push your luck here any further and yes.

        GET LOST.

        Like

        • Sweetheart, didn’t your mommy teach you that you shouldn’t be a nosy poker when two people are in the middle of a conversation? And what the hell are you that you show so much arrogance? What are you? I write my own blogs, Narayanastra author writes his own blogs, what do you do? Do you write your own blogs? Let me tell you what you are, just a puppet whose strings are at the hands of Narayanastra authors. You are a mere slave of his, dancing at his command. Same language, same content. Carbon copy of Narayanastra author. Be honest, will you lick dog stool from street if your bass asks you to? Will you let him sleep with your sis if he asks you to? I guess so, because you appear to be a e@n#ch dog who cannot do anything except licking Narayanastra author’s stool from his stinky &*% hole, wagging your tale like a small pup. So when you are such an impotent mutt who is dependent on Narayanastra author’s stool, better keep that stinky mouth of yours shut with your filthy tongue rolled in.

          Like

        • So now you have resorted to threatening me, huh? You will charge me with inciting communal tensions, right? That’s enough. Let me tell you my posts constantly spoke of Narayanastra authors and not the whole South Indian community, and I said “a large no. of Hindu homosexuals come from Gaudiya Vaishnava background, which is a true fact. Gaudiya Vaishnava homosexuals have a website of their own, known as GALVA. Besides that, a number of websites cite that marriages between uncle & niece etc is common in South India and such endogamous marriages are termed as incest in general. So tell me, on which grounds will you charge me? But let me tell you one thing, I haven’t deleted the comments of Narayanastra from my blog. I have simply made some changes in moderation section, because of which now only those who follow my blog can comment. Also, like admin of this page, I, the admin of Shiva Parvati blog too have the IP address of Narayanastra and yours as well as I met you first in youtube. And believe me, every time it were you people who started posting offensive comments and if I want I can charge you for that as well. So before advising me, take my advice, read my comments properly before jumping to conclusions. I am no terrorist to incite communal tensions. And if I am, then what are you, your friends and admins of Vaishnava websites which degrade Shaivism?

          Like

          • I don’t threaten Miss Nilalohita aka Mahakali… I only tell and then I do what I do. Keep your arguments safe with yourself as who knows you might need them in court. What you have done or not can only be judged under the legal framework of this country and trust me when I say this that forum is not privy or has an iota of space to your personal conjunctures. You write blogs and I don’t do anything you claimed. Well if I do decide to actually do what I am tempted to do trust me you may find maintaining your blog impossible because lets face it prisoners don’t get internet access and you wouldn’t be getting that for a very long time.

            As for my IP address… seriously!… Please do a google search on my name as it appears here. You shall have all the required details right there on your screen… I am not your sweetheart thus kindly desist from hurling such insults… I am not bothered about the choicest of invective you have hurled on me or your usage of gutter language as it only proves the foulness of your family lineage, your breeding and your upbringing… After I didn’t call you filth for nothing. Again with this crass act of yours you have only proved me right.

            Talking to you on Gmail… really… like seriously!… you got to be kidding me hahahahahahahahah… I say you need to consult a legal counsel immediately for he / she may be able to give you a clearer picture about how and what is on the verge of hitting the fan in your case if I do decide to take you up on and explain to you… what I do.

            Like

  22. Since when is being “ArdhanAri” a criterion for supremacy? Anyway, “ardhanAri” is also a name of vishNu if etymology is used. This she-cow continues to make a fool of herself. paShupati is declared to be a name of narasimha in the narasimha tApanIya upanishad itself.

    shuunya.n tatprakR^itirmaayaa brahmavij~naanamityapi |
    shivaH purushha iishaano nityamaatmeti kathyate |” (Maha Upanishad VI:61)
    “That Brahman has been (identified with) emptiness, Prakriti, Maya and also consciousness. It has also been said to be “Shiva – Purusha, Eshana, the eternal and the self (Atman)””.

    Her moronic ranting has failed to notice that we have interpreted this vAkya in the nArAyaNastra blog itself. The link is here: http://narayanastra.blogspot.in/p/the-absurdity-of-shakta-interpretations.html

    And note what is said under that vAkya she quoted,

    “Vaidika Interpretation: “Shiva”, “Purusha” and “IshAna” are names of nArAyaNa.”

    “sarvam sharvashivas sthAnur”, “ishAna prAnadaH”, etc occur in the sahasranAma. These are vishNu’s names. And the shakta nonsense has been demolished in that link.

    The translation given by this idiot (who just copies and pastes from various sources) is wrong. Brahman is identified with prakRti, which is of bewildering power (mAya) only by virtue of having everything as its body (yasya prithvi sarIram ~ Br.Up). Names that denote the body also denote the self. And this Brahman is also shUnya as it is devoid of doShas (shUnya doSha).

    Even the name “shUnya” occurs in sahasranAma.

    This moron does not even know the difference between Gaudiya, Sri, Madhva and Smarta vaishnavas and lumps all conclusions into one umbrella of “vaiShnavism”. First get a clear grip on ancient Shaiva and Vaishnava traditions before coming to refute.

    And then, a long and meandering rant – LMFAO, south indians marry their cousins? Only non-brahmins do that moron. You have been living near too many jihadi camps in kashmir, perhaps it has addled your brain.

    Enough of this nonsense. I can resort to n number of name-calling techniques, but this site would probably censor them all. Let her watch Devon Ke Dev, BR Chopra’s Mahabharat and other such nonsense…that’s all she can do. Heck, she can’t even reply to a single pramAna without degenerating into random subjects on science, etc. And note her stupidity – when we said Narasimha was reddish black in color, she declared lions are not red in color. LMAO, are we talking about ordinary lions here? This was paramAtma in the form of a lion, is there a limit to what he can do?

    And learn the difference between ISKCON and oher vaishnava traditions before spouting such nonsense. Ancient shaivas and shaktas were never vedic and never considered themselves to be so.

    Like

  23. And lastly, if you want to refute us, don’t hide behind multiple monikers and post on your obscure blog that no-one reads, or sites like these which are more populated by laymen devotees. Though your words are not even worthy of being considered as refutations or a challenge, come and address us directly at the Narayanastra blog. We will make sure you slink away defeated each time.

    Like

  24. “BTW I have never seen any Vaishnava showing any regard for Tantric writings. So it would be better if you don’t ask me to respect Pancharatric writings either, for nothing comes for free. A small transaction is required. If you expect respect out of others, you must be respectful as well.”

    Well, nitwit, you argue using the veda, right? Then admit that every vaidika, including “achAryaji” shankara, have accepted the pAncharAtra’s views on vyUhas and nArAyaNa being parabrahman as vaidika. In contrast, even “achAryaji” has discarded the shaiva system entirely and “achAryaji” says that shakta worship of mAtrikas are tAmasic.

    Ancient Shaivas and Shaktas never used the veda as pramAna. Some of them even rejected the veda. For them, their respective agamas and tantras are alone authority. Hence, you are fighting a battle which was lost a thousand odd years ago. Wonder what is your fixation with the veda when you don’t know one akShara and keep copying and pasting either Griffith’s translations or from Shaiva blogs which have already been refuted in the nArAyaNastra blog?

    And considering your language, you are certainly proving “AchAryaji” (rightfully known as Shankara BhagavadpAda, and one of the foremost vaishNava acharyas) as correct!

    Like

  25. My names? Your friends telling you about me? You know I don’t give a damp 2 u or your friends. And I don’t know who u r speaking of but I don’t possess such names.
    “You can’t even spell ‘Sahasra nama’ properly”
    I don’t think data u are so retarded or blind as to not notice data I had spelt it correctly in the very next sentence and ur brain didn’t give u even a hint day it was a typing error.
    How can I even take the pains to teach someone who doesn’t even understand the “s” of spirituality, something so high and esoteric as “Vishnu tattva” ?To a materialistic atheist with absolutely zero understanding of Vedanta, such high knowledge is always fictions or fairytale..
    I remember a proverb in English ” grapes are sour” in hindi” naach na Jaane angan teda” & in bengali” naachtey na parley u than baika” which fits ur situation. You can’t even understand the truth of the vedas and u keep on barking as if u know everything and every other thing is fictions, right?
    “BTW homosexuality is forbidden in the Vedas”
    Madam no one is discussing your or anyone else’s sexuality or fertility here.
    I don’t support it and neither do any traditional gaudiya or any other vaishnava school support it.this is not the teaching of our acharyas. And do you always talk like day speaking without any proofs whatsoever? Can you locate it from the writings of the acharyas of gaudiya vanishnavism?
    Well don’t you know day the vedic dharma shastras prohibit flesh eating for a Ryan and condemn it’s use in worship but still shakta and said as proceed with this unvedic occult practices even in their temples.
    Commenting on your parent marriages was to give u the taste of your own medicine.and yes incest is a taboo in santana dharma.but do u even know what’s a “gotra”? Half knowledge is very dangerous ma’am.even north Indian raj puts used to practice such marriages.arjuna married
    Subhadra, the neice of his mother kunti. Does that make him incestuous? Marrying in separate gotra is not considered incest. Also ur comment day we oppose intercaste marriage is false.it is allowed , provided it’s not patio ma vara sank ara. Pls do some research b4 commenting
    Regarding vaikuntha kamalaja, it was the answer to your statement dat vishnu and lakshmi cannot be worshipped in androgynous form and I have provided u the answer.the iconography came up from the various agamic and puranic statements where such a form is described. You objected dat it only belongs to Nepal area. Mind u dat even goddesses like sash ti, vandevi, meen akshi or nataraja are localised in bengal and d south respectively. Does dat prohibit the people of these regions from worshipping them?
    Reading science fiction is a good time pass but spirituality is not.it is said shiva lives in jail as ha but can u see him dre, why? Cos u r not qualified to see him.the vedas speak of the existence of such a chit jagat (spiritual world) beyond the influence of may a, prakriti, time, etc.but science has no proof of dat yet. Vedas also say that plants have life but a few centuries ago the scientists retook it to be a big joke. Science is prone to error but vedas are not. In the spiritual/vedic level, newtons laws and Shakespeare ‘ plays are material and hence won’t help u to progress spiritually. Contd.

    Like

    • I would like to correct something:
      I meant shiva lives in kailash but my mobile here changes the words into something else and I didn’t check it twice. Sorry 4 d mistake

      Like

      • @Sara nama kevala Hari nama…

        Dear Friend

        HARE KRISHNA!

        I strongly suggest that you should immediately stop replying to Nilalohita aka Mahakali. Please desist in all circumstances talking about Krishna with her. The purpose of this site is being beaten, which is to spread Krishna Consciousnesses. Remember it is not about proving that we must get involved into but only spreading the word of The all mighty Krishna to people who have patrata. There is no need to try and explain anything to her. She clearly is not a person worth considering fit to have such discourses with.

        A person who constantly abuses Vaishnava and Krishna and uses gutter language on open forum such as this is not fit and should be ignored as one would ignore filth laid on the road. I further request you to spread this word as well. As for what is to be done with her don’t worry she will face the music of her karma.

        Kind Regards
        Rishi

        Like

  26. Contd.
    According to the spotless vedantic philosophy of Achintya Bheda bheda and Shakti parinamavada prakriti, may a, kala, etc, everything is the bahiranga shakti of the supreme shaktiman the purusha, controller of all shaktis .who is the parambrahman of the vedas. All others are depended on him. That purusha is Narayana who is the controller of maya/prakriti. Being his shakti, prakriti in one sense is non different from him but yet it being material and controlled is different from purusha/brahman. That is the meaning of the shruti. Mathematics is not always suitable as I said b4 for the understanding of the vedas.mathematically,1-1=0.but if you consider brahma or the vedas, then the laws of mathematics are non applicable.
    The vedas say: om purnam adhah purnam idam purnat purmam udacyate…
    Which means if you take away the complete whole from the complete whole still the complete whole remains…
    Thus it is 1-1=1 or 1-0.345=1, etc.
    Here “1” indicates the complete whole which is Brahman. So this is the limit of maths or science with regard to vedas. Face the truth that u don’t know the abcd of Vedanta. What to speak of you even believe in the area invasion theory that has been debunked by scientists half a century ago.such an oldie racist you are!
    So cover your face with rag otherwise piles of spit and pig shit will cover your face.
    And I don’t have to explain how much I respect mother Durga the supreme material power. Another name of hers is bhakti and yoga maya, who connects (yogam) us to Sri Hari.she has been glorified immensely by the go swam ins and other gaudiya acharyas. So do not use such names 4 her .You are insulting ur own Ishta devata.
    Pancharatra has been glorified by many ancient vedic authorities including shankaracharya .tantric?? Pancharatra is also a tantric scripture dat is in accordance to the vedas and do not contradict it. You’ve got a wrong notion of tantra . FYI the sakta and shiva tantra whenever they don’t contradict the vedas have been quoted by our goswamins and acharyas whenever required. So you can’t say that we disregard the other tantra completely. U being a person having 0 knowledge of Vedanta telling dat pancharatra is not in sync with the vedas is dumb hilarious.
    If u do want to defeat us, do that with vedic reasoning and quotes from scriptures not by rambling like psychopaths and speaking like a foul mouthed barbarian. So show some same and act like an aryan(noble) if u claim to be one. And one more thing the narAyanastra blog authors are my seniors and since they belong to the sri vaishnava sampradaya I do respect them and they did not teach me. I have quoted that blog only when it is okay to do so from the gaudiya point of view.
    One more info : in some places instead of writing “dat”(that) I have by mistake typed “day”. So Pls excuse me.

    At last I am nothing but a puppet at the hands of the purusha rays. May they help me to quickly reach my goal:the lotus feet of the Divya dampati.

    Jeevane nidhane nityau Radha Krishnau gatir mama! (Sri Rupa Goswami’s Yugalashtakam)

    Like

  27. Furthermore excuse me for the wrong spellings in the comments I am replying from my cell phone and thus often type wrongly as I am not used to it.

    Like

    • (“My names? Your friends telling you about me?”)

      Sweetheart, before calling me a retard, answer me honestly, are you dyslexic? Or the word “perhaps” is unknown to you? No problem if you are not the person I am talking about. Maybe the uncanny resemblance of the usage of words is just a coincidence, or maybe you’re trying to mask yourself.

      (“You know I don’t give a damp 2 u or your friends. And I don’t know who u r speaking of but I don’t possess such names.”)

      As if I am dying to listen you bark. You and your friends are so cheap that you don’t even deserve my apathy. You are no different than a cockroach to me.

      (“I don’t think data u are so retarded or blind as to not notice data I had spelt it correctly in the very next sentence and ur brain didn’t give u even a hint day it was a typing error.”)

      I bet you are suffering from dyslexia, due to which you can shamelessly declare that you committed error while typing the name of something so important as Vishnu Sahasranama. Spelling it in next sentence correctly is no excuse to justify you error.

      (“How can I even take the pains to teach someone who doesn’t even understand the “s” of spirituality, something so high and esoteric as “Vishnu tattva”?”)

      No thanks, I am not interested in learning fiction, especially when I myself am a biology teacher.

      (“To a materialistic atheist with absolutely zero understanding of Vedanta, such high knowledge is always fictions or fairytale..”)

      I must admit, you can compete with stand-up comedian Kapil Sharma in cracking jokes. Okay, I don’t expect a dyslexic like you to comprehend even “v” of Vedanta, atleast you can tell me what is the Sanskrit word for atheist?

      (“I remember a proverb in English ” grapes are sour” in hindi” naach na Jaane angan teda” & in bengali” naachtey na parley u than baika” which fits ur situation.”)

      Even I am reminded of two proverbs in your case- “Kutte ko ghee hazam nahi hoti”, and “bhaluker hathe khonta”. Now let’s discuss how. 1st proverb in Hindi fits you as a dyslexic person like you to comprehend that the great sages who were scientists, mathematicians and historians will not write Aesop’s fables in Puranas and Samhitas. As far as Vedas are concerned, these very sages gleaned their principles from Vedas which is a clear-cut evidence that Vedas are not fairy tales as you believe them to be. Now 2nd proverb fits you as Vedas, when in armatures like you, can give rise to chaotic situations like this.

      (“You can’t even understand the truth of the vedas and u keep on barking as if u know everything and every other thing is fictions, right?”)

      You’re such a copy-cat. I used the word “bark” for you and you foolishly copy my word:). But you know something, by draping tiger skin, dog doesn’t becomes tiger, and I am the tigress here. Likewise, simply by copying my words you can’t revert your status as a dog, since you and your friends have proved yourselves as flea-bitten rabid dogs by trying to outnumber me. BTW, when did you four were dragged to dog-pound last time?

      (“Madam no one is discussing your or anyone else’s sexuality or fertility here.
      I don’t support it and neither do any traditional gaudiya or any other vaishnava school support it.this is not the teaching of our acharyas. And do you always talk like day speaking without any proofs whatsoever? Can you locate it from the writings of the acharyas of gaudiya vanishnavism?”)

      Now don’t tell me there were no ISKCON Acharyas who did not sodomized children! In a number of websites some sensible Gaudiya Vaishnavas who are really worth of honour for protesting against wrong, bash them. BTW check this website: http://www.galva108.org/

      (“Well don’t you know day the vedic dharma shastras prohibit flesh eating for a Ryan and condemn it’s use in worship but still shakta and said as proceed with this unvedic occult practices even in their temples.”)

      I know that but perhaps you don’t know that eating meat is allowed for Kshatriyas once in a fort night and moreover, there is no general ban on meat eating for Kshatriyas. Also, I would like to tell you that your overconfidence fails you every time. You know nothing of Tantras, that is evident from your childish ba-ba, boo-boos. Tantras say that there are three modes of worshiping Kali Ma in Dakshinachar- Divya, Vira and Pashu, and at the same time Tantras say that a Sadhak must never worship in Pashu mode while Divya and Vira modes are preferred. Divya mode is for Brahmins and no animal sacrifices are involved while Kshatriyas are prescribed Vira mode in which meat is offered and consumed as Prasad.

      (“Commenting on your parent marriages was to give u the taste of your own medicine.”)

      How and why.

      (“and yes incest is a taboo in santana dharma.but do u even know what’s a “gotra”? Half knowledge is very dangerous ma’am.even north Indian raj puts used to practice such marriages.arjuna married
      Subhadra, the neice of his mother kunti. Does that make him incestuous? Marrying in separate gotra is not considered incest.”)

      Sweety, Kurus and Yadus were Chandravanshis, and exogamy rules are not that strict in them. But Suryavanshis are rigid regarding incest, even if two cousins are of separate Gotras. Incest is prohibited in Sanatan Dharma to avoid in breeding depression. Now I don’t think that you’ll understand this term, so let me define it. It is a situation in which genetically related individuals mate for successive 4-6 generations, resulting into infertility and poor immunity. Moreover, Chandravanshis, who practiced birth-determined hierarchy, preferred to keep their bloodline “pure”. So occasional inbreeding was ok for them. But this inbreeding was reserved between cousins only, unlike South Indians who marry their own siblings, parents, uncles or aunts. That’s really gross.

      (“Also ur comment day we oppose intercaste marriage is false.it is allowed , provided it’s not patio ma vara sank ara. Pls do some research b4 commenting”)

      When did I say that you people oppose inter-caste?:) Beta, josh mein hosh nahi khote.

      (“Regarding vaikuntha kamalaja, it was the answer to your statement dat vishnu and lakshmi cannot be worshipped in androgynous form and I have provided u the answer.the iconography came up from the various agamic and puranic statements where such a form is described.”)

      Can you quote some?

      (“You objected dat it only belongs to Nepal area. Mind u dat even goddesses like sash ti, vandevi, meen akshi or nataraja are localised in bengal and d south respectively. Does dat prohibit the people of these regions from worshipping them?”)

      Vana Bibi (Vandevi) was a Muslim princess and is worshiped by people in Sunderbans. Minakshi Devi was a fiery princess and due to her status as a warrior, was often compared with Durga Ma, just like at present times we do with Jhansi ki Rani Lakshmibai. But mind that these two local goddesses are not worshiped anywhere beyond Sundarbans and Tamil Nadu, and I am a Kashmiri!:) Well as far as Shashti Devi is concerned, she is not confined to Bengal, but worshiped across the Indian subcontinent by the name of Chhathi. Sweetheart, Like Bengalis who arrange for Shashti Puja on birth of a child, likewise North Indians arrange for Chhathi Puja. Also, Chhath Puja in Bihar is held in the honour of Sun and Shashti. Also, Shashti finds mention in Skanda Purana as one of the names of Devasena, wife of Kartikeya. And Natraj is presiding deity of Chidambaram, one of the 64 Jyotirlingas. So other than Vana Bibi & Minakshi Devi, Shashti Devi & Natraj are not local deities. But since I myself am Kashmiri, I know that Vaikuntha Kamalaja is an iconography which evolved here in 11th century AD and later spread to Nepal via Himachal and Uttarakhand. Perhaps this was work of Kapalika Shaivites but being Shaivite doesn’t means that we will approve anything, because we are authentic Aryans who trace back their origin to the Great Indus Valley.

      (“Reading science fiction is a good time pass but spirituality is not.it”)

      Perhaps, but science fiction is based on scientifically proved principles and can become true in future, unlike the so-called spirituality of yours which is based on cock & bull fairy tales and sheer superstitions. BTW spirituality is one of the topics in psychology and quantum physics.

      (“is said shiva lives in jail as ha but can u see him dre, why? Cos u r not qualified to see him.”)

      Which jail? Tihar jail?:) And who says one cannot see Lord Shiva? I see him everywhere, after all he is the principle on which energy and matter form the universe. I am qualified as I know how science works and how science and spirituality (not to be confused with Vaishnava pseudo-spirituality) are linked with each other. But the harsh fact is that it is you who possesses no qualification as you neither know ‘s’ of science, nor do you know ‘s’ of spirituality. Maybe you suffer from hallucinations as well, confuse spirituality (part of psychology & quantum physics) with the cock & bull fairy tales, which are mocked by even knee-high kindergartens. 🙂

      (“the vedas speak of the existence of such a chit jagat (spiritual world) beyond the influence of may a, prakriti, time, etc.but science has no proof of dat yet.”)

      Dear, Quantum physics has proved that the so-called “chit-jagat” is multiverse and are part of nature as they are influenced by black-holes. So, if you are following Prabhupada’s writings, then know this that he lived decades ago and within these few decades, science has made significant discoveries that refute the old chap’s superstitions.

      (“Vedas also say that plants have life but a few centuries ago the scientists retook it to be a big joke.”)

      Vedas say so because Vedas deal with science. The scientists you are speaking of hailed from Abrahmic backgrounds and succeeded only when they surrendered to Mother of modern science, Vedas. Now Vedas also say that Daivi Astras like Pashupatastra, Rudrastra, Vaishnavastra, Narayanastra, Brahmastra, Brahmashira, Shaktiastra, Agneyastra etc were nuclear fission/ nuclear fusion weapons. Somras (Amrit) was a medicinal drink rather than some magical potion. But will you believe these? I don’t think so.

      (“Science is prone to error but vedas are not. In the spiritual/vedic level, newtons laws and Shakespeare ‘ plays are material and hence won’t help u to progress spiritually.”)

      Do you always talk stupid or are you acting stupid specially? Science and Vedas are like jal and pani. And I have compared myself as a believer of Newton’s laws and you as a believer of Romeo & Juliet. So take my advice, first consult a psychiatrist, and then join some English course, for you appear to be an illiterate as well.

      (“According to the spotless vedantic philosophy of Achintya Bheda bheda and Shakti parinamavada prakriti, may a, kala, etc, everything is the bahiranga shakti of the supreme shaktiman the purusha, controller of all shaktis .who is the parambrahman of the vedas.”)

      Spotless! I remember, once a Gaudiya Vaishnava made a stupid statement that SB is greater than Vedas and Vedas should be trashed. Now you are saying that this Achintya Bhed Abheda mumbo-jumbo is spotless! A sect that approves filthy acts such as homosexuality and gay marriage is spotless! You have cracked joke of the year. You’re a Bengali, right? But first things first, can you name those Shaktis? I know few names Dhi, Vrtti, Usana, Urna, Niyuta, Sarpis, Ila, Ambika, Iravatl, Sudha, Diksa, Bahurupa, Tara, Narmada, Yamuna, Shanti, Varuni, Kshemankari, Aindri, Varahi, Ranveera, Vanara-Mukhi, Vaishnavi, Kalaratri, Vaidyaroopa, Charchika, Betali, Chinnamastika, Vrishabahana, Jwala Kamini, Ghatavara, Karakali, Sarasvati, Birupa, Lakshmi, Kauveri, Bhaluka, Narasimhi, Biraja, Vikatanna, Mahalakshmi, Kaumari, Maha Maya, Rati, Karkari, Sarpashya, Yakshini, Aghora, Bhadrakali, Vinayaki, Vindya Balini, Veera Kumari, Maheshwari, Ambika, Kamiyani, Ghatabari, Stutee, Kali, Narayani, Samudraa, Brahmini, Jwala Mukhi, Agneyei, Aditi, Chandrakanti, Vayubega, Chamunda, Murati, Ganga, Dhumavati, Gandhari, Sarva Mangala, Ajita, Surya Putri, Vayu Veena, Ugra, Mahougra, Vajra, Mahasarasvati, Lochana, Yamaki, Pandara, Aryatara, Vajradhatrishvari, Vichitra, Vibhrama, Hamsi, Bhishani, Janaranjika, Vishala, Madhana, Ghanta, Kalakarni, Mahabhaya, Mahendri, Shankhini, Chandri, Shmashana, Vatayakshini, Mekhala, Vikala, Malini, Shatapatrika, Sulochana, Shobha, Kapalini, Varayakshini, Nati, Kameshvari, Manohara, Pramoda, Anuragini, Nakhakeshi, Bhamini, Padmini, Svarnavati, Ratipriya, Chakreshvari, Rohini, Ajitbala, Prajnapti, Duritari, Vajrashrankhala, Vajrankusha, Manovega, Shyama, Shanta, Jwalamalini, Bhrikuti, Mahakali, Sutaraka, Ashoka, Gauri, Manavi, Chanda, Vairoti, Vidita, Anantamati, Ankusha, Manasi, Kandarpa, Mahamansi, Nirvani, Jaya, Bala, Dharini, Vijaya, Dharanpriya, Aparajita, Nardatta, Bahurupini, Kushmandini, Padmavati and Siddhayika.

      (“All others are depended on him. That purusha is Narayana who is the controller of maya/prakriti. Being his shakti, prakriti in one sense is non different from him but yet it being material and controlled is different from purusha/brahman. That is the meaning of the shruti.”)

      Okay, so only because Shakti is controlled by Purusha, she becomes inferior to him. And how will Purusha act if Shakti doesn’t cooperate with him? I don’t know what you people think but we believe that Purusha and Prakriti are like fire and its ability to burn. What is Purusha if he is devoid of Shakti? We see that Lord Shiva loses his mind when Lady Sati commits self-immolation. Also, Lord Ram, the pinnacle of Suryavanshi lifestyle, lost his composure when Ravan kidnapped Lady Sita. These are symbols that there cannot be creation without Shakti. It is impossible to separate principle, energy and matter.

      (“Mathematics is not always suitable as I said b4 for the understanding of the vedas.mathematically,1-1=0.but if you consider brahma or the vedas, then the laws of mathematics are non applicable.
      The vedas say: om purnam adhah purnam idam purnat purmam udacyate…
      Which means if you take away the complete whole from the complete whole still the complete whole remains…
      Thus it is 1-1=1 or 1-0.345=1, etc.
      Here “1″ indicates the complete whole which is Brahman. So this is the limit of maths or science with regard to vedas.”)

      That’s a sacrilege. 1 is a finite number you fool. The verse from Maha Upanishad says that Brahman is Shunyata (emptiness, 0). But being a dyslexic, you didn’t notice it. Poor kid! 0 is the only digit which symbolizes infinity, and Brahman is infinite. The invocation from Isa Upanishad that you quoted is correct, as Brahman is Shunyata (0). So no matter you take away the complete whole from the complete whole, or you add the complete whole to the complete whole, still the complete whole remains. How? 0+0=0, 0-0=0, 0x0=0 and 0/0=0. This is simple mathematics, but a dyslexic takes longer time to comprehend this simple thing. So, Science and maths being parts of Vedas has no limits, unlike your limited thinking.

      (“Face the truth that u don’t know the abcd of Vedanta.”)

      Why should I bother about ABCD when I know V of Vedanta? But you can concentrate on ABCD. Good for a dyslexic like you.

      (“What to speak of you even believe in the area invasion theory that has been debunked by scientists half a century ago.such an oldie racist you are!”)

      Because that is what biology reveals. A pedigree analysis programme that was organized by Nat Geo in the year of 2010 reveals that North Indians are descendents of Aryans while South Indians are descendents of Dravidians and/or mix of Aryan & Dravidians. So what scientists “debunked” half-century ago, has been proven true only four years ago. 🙂

      (“So cover your face with rag otherwise piles of spit and pig shit will cover your face.”)

      I don’t care about what happens to me. Concentrated Hydrochloric Acid (HCl) and acid burns couldn’t stop me, forget about filth. BTW I didn’t knew that I am so important to you that you’ll lick pig shit from street and then spit on me. But how will you? Do you think you’re James Bond and will hunt me down out of a population more than 10 billion? Be practical, this is not some Tamil film of Rajnikanth, but real life. I know that you live in fantasy world and it is natural for you to believe that your this fantasy will come true as well. But what you are fantasizing is far from reality. However, you can lick as much of pig shit you want. Good for you. Suits you so well.

      (“And I don’t have to explain how much I respect mother Durga the supreme material power. Another name of hers is bhakti and yoga maya, who connects (yogam) us to Sri Hari.she has been glorified immensely by the go swam ins and other gaudiya acharyas. So do not use such names 4 her .You are insulting ur own Ishta devata.”)

      Maybe you do, afterall Durga Puja is like Christmas to all Bengalis. But your Guru doesn’t have you read Prabhupada’s Bhagavad Gita as it is Ch.6? There, in one of his purports, he writes that “A person fully into Krishna consciousness becomes transcendental to temptations”. He gives the example of Lord Shiva and Lady Parvati for this, stating that Lady Parvati titillated Lord Shiva for sense pleasure, and Lord Shiva agreed, resulting into birth of Kartikeya. Then, Prabhupada gives example of some Haridas Thakur, who came across a call-girl once, but unlike Lord Shiva, he didn’t give in to the temptations. Now what would you say about this? Also, check the discourses of Tamal Krishna Gosvami, where he describes Kali Ma as “a ghastly deity who loves blood-sacrifice”. So sweetheart, I am not insulting Kali Ma, but pulling down the pants of Gaudiya Vaishnavas by exposing them and the bogus teachings of their “spotless” principles. We never degrade Lady Lakshmi like this. But you Vaishnavas do degrade Kali Ma in such a nasty way.

      (“Pancharatra has been glorified by many ancient vedic authorities including shankaracharya”)

      Only because the word Pancharatra has been used by Acharyaji in his commentary of Brahma Sutra, you hallucinated that Pancharatra implies to Vaishnava Tantras, and not the five-night long Yagna mentioned in Satpatha Brahmana, performed by Sage Narayana, after which he became enlightened.

      (“tantric?? Pancharatra is also a tantric scripture dat is in accordance to the vedas and do not contradict it. You’ve got a wrong notion of tantra “)

      I am talking about Shakta Tantras.

      (“FYI the sakta and shiva tantra whenever they don’t contradict the vedas have been quoted by our goswamins and acharyas whenever required.”)

      Yeah right. That’s why Vaishnava Acharyas call Shakta Tantras bogus.

      (“So you can’t say that we disregard the other tantra completely.”)

      You mock Tantric philosophy and then say that you don’t disregard of them! This is like an obsessed serial killer speaking of non-violence.

      (“U being a person having 0 knowledge of Vedanta telling dat pancharatra is not in sync with the vedas is dumb hilarious.”)

      Remember, I told you 0=Infinity? So thanks for the compliment, as you think that I posses infinite knowledge of Vedanta (though what I know is a drop of ocean), and also admitting that you are a psycho.

      (“If u do want to defeat us, do that with vedic reasoning and quotes from scriptures not by rambling like psychopaths and speaking like a foul mouthed barbarian.”)

      Tell me one thing, what’s wrong in calling Narayanastra authors by the names which rightfully belong to him? Also, as I told you yesterday, if you expect respect out of others, you must honour in return. A small transaction is compulsory, where you must do something to earn it. Had your boss been respectful from the beginning and not raised questions on my honour, pride, character, caste and parentage, I wouldn’t had been so cruel towards him. You think it yourself, if your boss dares to pull the whiskers of a tigress, will she let him go so easily? Answer is NO. Also I would had been that cruel to you as well if you would have dishonoured me. So kindly interrogate that psycho first about what conversation took place between us.

      (“So show some same and act like an aryan(noble) if u claim to be one”)
      Your opinion doesn’t matter. There are a lot of people who honour me because of what I am, and I don’t need any certificate from your incestuous boss for that.

      (“And one more thing the narAyanastra blog authors are my seniors and since they belong to the sri vaishnava sampradaya I do respect them and they did not teach me.”)

      Did he earn it?

      (“I have quoted that blog only when it is okay to do so from the gaudiya point of view.”)

      “Gopal Tapini & Ram Tapini Upanishads are bogus”, this is one of the statements made by Narayanastra authors. Why? Because these two Upanishads say Krishna and Ram are supreme instead of Vishnu or Narasimha. Don’t you think this is crazy? But well, your statement shows that you are not in complete agreement with him. So where’s the respect? Moreover, when you yourself are doubtful regarding all statements made by Narayanastra authors, do you have any right to dismiss my principles and force me to adopt yours and your friend’s belief? Think about it peacefully.

      (“One more info : in some places instead of writing “dat”(that) I have by mistake typed “day”. So Pls excuse me.
      Instead of aryan I wrote area. Sorry 4 d mistake
      Furthermore excuse me for the wrong spellings in the comments I am replying from my cell phone and thus often type wrongly as I am not used to it.”)

      It’s okay. It happens sometimes. Not a big deal at all.

      (“At last I am nothing but a puppet at the hands of the purusha rays. May they help me to quickly reach my goal:the lotus feet of the Divya dampati.”)

      May you achieve your goal. Sri Ram Jai Ram Jai Jai Ram.

      P.S I don’t mean any dishonour to anyone. So don’t have any hard feelings. And remember, honour others if you expect honour out of others. So I hope that next time I won’t have to resort to become a harridan and lash you with bitter words.

      Like

  28. Dear mahakali,
    Lets come to the point:
    The web address that you gave is of an institution that has no connection with mainstream ISKCON.Nowhere did Prabhupada order such kind of institutions to be made and he himself opposed such kind of unnatural marriages as I have heard in an audio recording. We are ourselves very much disgusted that such an institution is running under the name of ISKCON. The entire school of Gaudiya Vaishnavism does not come under the canopy of ISKCON. I myself am a follower of Sri Sri Gaudiya Math.Also there are some topics of Gaudiya Vedanta itself that are misinterpreted by some institutions that use the name of ISKCON. The Gaudiya Math is the only modern institution that incorporates the entire philosophy of Sriman Mahaprabhu in its actual form.
    ISKCON was supposed to be like that but some individuals who not following the teachings of Prabhupada have given rise to these kinds of problems.
    So don’t use the term Gaudiya vaishnavism in these kinds of cases.
    It would be like calling all Muslims terrorists even if only a few really are!

    The “childish ba-ba boo-boos” that you talk about have been declared unvedic by ancient authorities like Bhaskaracharya,Kumarila Bhatta, Shankaracharya,etc.”Divya,Vira,Pashu” can be modes of worshipping Durga but still that does not make them in accordance with the vedas.Yes it is true that Kshatriyas can eat meat but it is also a great virtue if Kshatriyas prohibit themselves from doing so. The Dharma shastras prohibit usage of meat in pujas even for Kshatriyas most of the time. But we see that animal sacrifices are performed daily in some temples with unvedic agama affiliation. Also the scriptures that you talk about contain these things such as Kali remains satisfied for 100 years if narabali is done or three ram sacrifice is equal to 1 buffalo sacrifice(Kalika Purana)
    *******************************************************
    sa lomAsthi svairam palalamapi mArjAramasite
    paramchauShTram maiSham naramahiShayoShchAgamapi vA
    balim te pujAyAmayi vitaratAm martyavasatAm
    satAm siddhih sarvA pratipadamapUrva prabhavati

    A part of the sloka ie., *naramahiShayoShchAgamapi vA balim* >listing out
    different types of Bali for the siddhi of the Karpura >Stotra mentions about
    *Nara Bali* or human sacrifice.There are many such texts on such gory rites mentioned in such avaidika scriptures. It is these portions that we vaidikas refute. There are historical evidences on severel books of such kinds giving descriptions of worship of ghosts,spirits,etc. and the fruit that can be got from such acts. Such books also prescribe maithuna (sex) to be a method of sadhana.

    Other such quotes:
    Kularnava tantra 9. 50 says:
    alimAMsA~NganAsa~Nge yatsukhaM jAyate priye.
    tadeva mokSho viduShAm abudhAnAntu pAtakam..
    “O my Beloved! The joy derived from wine, meat and coition with women is Liberation for the wise, but a sin for the ignorants.

    (Means that Vedantists(like shankaracharya) and followers of Dharma
    shastras are ignorants)

    In Brihannila-tantra (8. 90) it is said:
    striyo devAH striyaH prANAH striya eva vibhUShaNam.
    strImelanaM sadA kuryAtsundarIbhirvisheShataH..
    “Women are divine, women are breaths of life, women are the ornament.
    One should always unite with women, especially with beautiful.”

    *****Even Vivekananda refuted such adharmic scriptures in his speeches*****

    You may quote a text from some latter day text and say that these are only metaphors,etc.but let me ask u a question. If that was so,why were these things performed literally in the past and even now sometimes.

    Regarding shakti parinamavada that Gaudiyas profess. Vishnu has three shaktis: Antaranga,Tatastha and Bahiranga. Antaranga consists of the Lord’s consorts, who are all manifestations of Lakshmi, yogamaya, etc. Tatastha is actually jiva who are also antaranga but because they can be covered by maya, they are tatastha (marginal). Bahiranga is the maya sakti, and its products like kala, karma, etc. Mahamaya is the personification of maya sakti.
    Actually there is only one para shakti of Vishnu (antaranga) who manifests herself in he other 2 forms. Just because some random person makes some comment, it doesnt mean that u paint all of us in the same colour. The Shiva and Parvati thing is a lila to show that even the great god Shiva can fall under maya what to speak of us significant jivas.

    Brahman is not sunya although he has the name sunya. If you take brahman to be sunya, then you become a sunyavadi (buddhists) philosophies of which have been refuted in Vedanta Sutra.

    Sita is lakshmi.Even if not visible with Rama, it is understood that she is present unmanifest within him. Also the “Sita” that Ravana kidnapped was a false form, a illusion created by mahamaya Durga. It was this Durga that was carried by Ravana that destroyed him. The Lord employed his mahamaya to bring destruction to Ravana.This is stated in kurma puran.

    Narayanastra authors didnt say that the Gopal and Ram Tapani upanisads are bogus. They only said that they are not considered to be completely authentic cos dre exist few old commentaries on them.But it is their opinion not ours. We belong to different schools remember?

    I took 1 as an assumption for indicating brahman not in the literal sense.

    Now we are really digressing from the main topic and hence wont talk more on this. As i said pls speak from vedic evidences. We do not want to spend time in a useless conversation, which is unvedic and non enlightening at all. This will be my last comment unless you want to discuss in more vedic way.
    Thank you!Best of luck for ur future.

    Sarvam Sri Radha Krishna arpanamastu!

    Like

  29. FYI 0 is not equal to infinity. Any number divided by infinity is equal to zero.
    Infinity is inversely proportional to zero.

    Like

  30. // 0 is the only digit which symbolizes infinity, and Brahman is infinite. //

    Shows only Nilalohita is dyslexic, to think that zero ‘symbolizes’ infinity.

    // FYI 0 is not equal to infinity. Any number divided by infinity is equal to zero.
    Infinity is inversely proportional to zero. //

    As a mathematician by profession, I would like to add a remark here.

    Infinity is not a number i.e., it is not an element in the field of real numbers. Infinity is only a concept to describe sequences that are not bounded and to describe divergent series. And unlike zero, you can not subtract or divide two infinities.

    Also, no number can be divided by zero. 1 divided by 0 is not “infinity”, but technically “not defined in the field”. This is different from saying “The division of 1 by a quantity that approaches 0 approaches infinity”.

    Like

    • HARE KRISHNA!

      Dear Naravanastra Authors and Sarva nama sri hari nama…

      That girl Nilalohita aka Mahakali… is a freak!… She is not arguing to put a point across but only to sling mud… I went through the entire Purport of 6 ch of Bhagvat Gita by Srila Prabhupada and there is no mention of Lord Shiva and goddess Parvati titillating him. This kind of misnomer is being injected by this insolent scoundrel because we continue to answer her in order to prove that we know more.

      This is not and should never become our purpose… I am sorry. This fool has crossed all lines of decency and if yet we believe that entertaining her replies with ours is important then Krishna alone can save us. The lengths she has purposefully stooped down to in order cheaply prove herself right is well documented on this page and any self respecting person would have died in shame if he / she had conducted himself / herself in this manner.

      The audacity and shamelessly with, which she affords herself a concocted family lineage ( for obvious reasons the real one doesn’t even get someone to p..s on it ) not to forget her eloquence though only in usage of gutter language on this page is a glaring poof of who and what kind of dirty stinking trash we all are dealing with here.

      She calls mata Laxmi…. lady Laxmi abuses great Gurus… this filth should not be given anymore credence than what’s already been given top her. You can teach a dog or any animal but certainly a foolish person not ready to learn and she is the finest example.

      Narayanastra Author… when I answered all her queries by coping and pasting beautiful excerpts from your blog with an earnest desire to answer her questions she simply wrote back not with befitting counter argument but by passing personal disparaging remarks and declared like an idiot on open forum that she had been given the same material by 75 people and that I was 76th. Yet I replied to her again but this with beautiful excerpts supporting my contention from Rig Veda, Yajur Veda… etc but she only got abusive.

      Sarva nama sri hari nama,,, You need to know there is nothing you have said, which does not reply all her queries but she is not interested in it. All she is interested in is win as if she is practically begging for it.

      If you guys feel that its ok to invite unnecessary abuses on your respective Guru Maharaj and The all Mighty Lord Krishna then go ahead argue with her. If you feel that this girl should be avoided at all cost the go ahead and avoid her like you would avoid keeping trash in your house.

      Kind and warm regards

      Rishi

      Like

  31. They are same but yet there is a difference. knowledge will let you know about both the aspects and wisdom gained from Hari bhakti will make you understand, experience, appreciate and blissfully enjoy the esoteric meaning of these aspects, which exists simultaneously not in contradiction or coercion but as pure truth, which lies untouched far above and beyond the reach of limitations such as contradiction or coercion.

    Like

    • Thank you for your post sir!

      The truth about the relationship of Sri Vishnu and Shiva or Brahma etc. is that Shiva, Brahma, Indra, Agni, etc. are posts that are occupied by different personalities at different times. The high posts like Indra, Brahma and Shiva are occupied mainly by jivas (indiviual living entities). When a qualified jiva in some kalpas to play these roles are sometimes unavailable, Lord Vishnu himself performs the role of Indra, Brahma or Shiva.

      Regarding Lord Shiva, as per Gaudiya theology, there exists a svamsha incarnation of Lord Vishnu, called SADASHIVA established in his own abode at Vaikuntha. This abode is called Shivaloka which is different from Kailasha. Sri Sanatana Goswamipada has described Him and His abode in Brihad Bhagavatamrita by quoting a verse from Sri Vayu purana. Sri Rupa Goswamipada has described Him in Laghu Bhagavatamrita by giving reference to the same Vayu purana verse and also by quoting Sri Brahma samhita as well and Sri Vishwanatha Chakravarti Thakura has described this form briefly in his Sri Bhagavatamrita kanika.

      Lord Sadashiva is Lord Vishnu /Sri Krishna himself appearing as his plenary portion(swamsha avatara). He resides with his consort Goddess Uma, the incarnation of Srimati Lakshmi. But the Shiva of the material world is sometimes a jiva, empowered by lord Sadashiva who is a form of Vishnu like Matsya,Kurma, etc. and sometimes when such pious jivas are not available, Lord Sadashiva’s direct incarnation takes the material world’s shiva’s role. Lord Sadashiva’s activities are wonderful. Though he himself is Lord Vishnu, he still worships lord Shankarshana with utmost devotion along with his consort and associates. when in Brahma samhita it is said that Shiva and Vishnu’s relationship is like milk transformed into yogurt, it is to be understood with the example of a cintamani jewel which itself gives rise to several valuable items but itself doesnot undergo any transformation. Te milk-yogurt analgy is t be understood in this manner:

      1. When Vishnu himself takes up the role of Shiva, it apparently “seems” that material nature covers him, but it is actually not so because Brahman cannot be covered by maya. Thus the statement of the brahma samhita would mean that by playing the role of shiva, Lord Vishnu becomes the master of maya directly, without geting affected by it.

      2. When a pious jiva is appointed to be Shiva,he is sometimes under the influence of maya and being a jiva he sometimes does offences due to getting bewildered. Thus in that way being an avesha avatara of the Lord that particular jiva is said to be a “tansformation” of vishnu.

      The same 2 above conditions apply to the posts of Brahma and Indra as well. The highest post of these is that of Shiva. Usually a jiva who has played the role of Brahma continuously for hundred lifetimes becomes eligible to play the role of Shiva. It is spoken by Shiva himself in Srimad Bhagavatam. Thus a jiva becoming Shiva is extremely rare and so in most cases Lord Sadashiva himself comes to the earth to play Siva’s role.The jiva playing the role of shiva has has Lord Shankarshana as his indweller. the jiva who is a brahma has Lord Pradyumna has hi indweller,etc.

      Hope tis is enough to clarify Shivaji’s relationship to lord vishnu.

      Haribol!

      Like

      • I agree with you but pls refer to Brahmasamhita. Shiva is not a post. He is a personality of God Head but still not Vishnu / Krishna. Ordinary human beings can become Brahma but not Shiva through their karma.

        Like

        • Sir whatever I have written, I have seen and read from works like Laghu Bhagavatamrita, Shat Sandarbha, Bhagavatamrita kana and Madhurya Kadambini etc. where the same thing is explained by the ancient Gaudiya acharyas like Sri Rupa, Sri Jiva and Sri Vishwanath. They have explained and written the truth by studying all shastras including Brahma Samhita and have explained it and I have only reproduced it. You can study these texts if you want to crosscheck.

          Like

          • As I have tried to explain to you before Sarva Nama Kevala Hari Nama… Let me again explain to you… Shiva is a personality of God Head…He is not the supreme Personality of Godhead yet none the less he is a personality of The supreme personality Of God Head Krishna…

            Laghu Bhagavatamrita, Shat Sandarbha, Bhagavatamrita kana and Madhurya Kadambini… There is no where written in the above mentioned books that a normal soul can attain the level of Shiva… It doesnt happen ever… Yes the most he can attain is Lord Brahma… that is it… Its mentioned in the books above mentioned as well as in Brahma Samhita and Bhagvatam… Pls understand Shiva is not Vishnu yet he is Vishnu … eg. Butter is not milk… yet butter is milk only in its original for… You can say Butter is an adulterated from of milk is a manner… like wise is in the case of Lord Shiva… I hope this would help

            Like

        • The Shiva which ordinary people cannot become is Vishnu’s incarnation called Sadashiva but a very pious jiva can occupy the position of Shiva(in the material world) which is rare.

          Like

  32. ALL of these people are just foolish. they have proud and they can be considered as Modern DAKSHA PRAJAPATI. Shiva is beyond your reach. He can be pleased soon but it is difficult to be a friend of shiva. HE is Maheshwar, Mahadev, Devon ke dev, Adipurusha ,Shambhu, Avinashi and what not. He is formless but at the same time he has form .He is Trikaldarshi, trilokswami, lord of all arts. You people just boast, spreads rumours, speaks about krishna who himself followed lord shiva’s teachings. Lord krishna virat roop which you boasts , is nothing but shiva himself. We all have mini god in us that is called soul. Every soul is a part of supreme soul (lord shiva), krishna with the help of yoga had attained power. And don’t forget Lord shiva is Adiyogi. when we say lord mahadev is immortal that means he is present in the body in the form of soul. Krishna himself died but his soul which is a part of supreme soul merged with lord Mahadev at the end. Every avatar of lord shiva is immortal e.g.. hanuman ji. Krishna was like prophet( in west he Was Christ). But he is god coz of his deeds. A human can become a god but nobody can be ishwar. Lord shiva is Maheshwar. They say Shiva smokes. Have you seen shiva smoking? My interpretation says Yes he Smokes, But if you see ayurved medicinal smoking was a part of dinchrya. Hate him , curse him, insult him but one thing you can’t do is that avoiding him. he can’t be avoided as he is present in our body in the form of soul. So , wake up Dakshas, adishakti cannot take insult of his Adipurusha. Shiva is shiva he don’t care what You are saying about him But any insult of Adishakti is something he can’t take. Insulting Adishakti or prakriti can create irreversible harms. Rest is upto you. Har had Mahadev. Shivoham shivoham shivoham.

    P.s :-2012 was the year when we human has got a chance of reconstructing DNA. Reconstruct your thoughts. Last chance of survival.

    Like

    • shiva devotees are demons ravan is shiva devotee vishnu avtar ram killed ravana, hiranyakashyap is shiva devotee narasimha killed hiranyakashyap, hiranyaksha is shiva devotee varaha killed hiranyaksha, kumbhakarna is shiva devotee rama killed kumbhakarna, our lord vishnu killed so many shiva devotees in his avatar but your shiva never killed any single vishnu devotees jarasanda is shiva devotee bhima is vishnu devotee bhima killed jarasanda your shiva failed to save his devotees thirupathi is world richest vsihnu temple even his temple is more powerful than other gods so only lord vishnu is supreme god

      Like

  33. People argue with others when instead they should ague with themselves. Its as if they’re trying to convince themselves that they are right .
    everyone is cursing one another beliving he himself is right. No one thinks I can be wong. One blind man followed by another. Truth be true , nothing can change the truth neither time nor gods themselves , such is the law of universe .
    A name does not define God. However gods are given names according to the functions they perform.
    Most people put their faith in gods based on their names.

    It is said that the supreme soul (sadashiva we call him) divided himself from nirguna (without attributes)
    to sauguna brahman (with the three gunas). thus forming 2 things 1- prakriti and 2- Conciousness
    Pratkriti is the mother of Brahma , Vishnu and Mhesha(Shiva /Rudra we call him ).
    >Brahma-created the world and still creates.
    >Vishnu- Entered the world himself.
    The traditional Sanskrit explanation of the name Vishu involves the root viś, meaning “to settle, to enter”, or also (in the Rigveda) “to pervade”, and a suffix nu, translating to approximately “the All-Pervading One”
    >Shiva- destroys it at the end of kalpa doing his chaotic cosmic dance (tandav).

    bahma(creation), vishnu(foreseer, preserver of life) ,as there is no need for them now because the world has to be destroyed, enters into shiva as the world is being destroyed
    Shiva being the destroyer aspect (destroys everything, even death) remains and takes the form of Sadashiva.
    So, only sadashiva(sada- eternal , shiva- bliss) remains.
    Sat-chit- ananda = truth-conciousness-eternal bliss = sada shiva.

    In truth it does not come to strenght but to the functions they perform in this world of ours.

    One does not need to be their devotee to attain moksha or gain powers ,for one oneself is in truth not different from brahman, by destroying ignorance.
    But it is beneficial to pray to them for their mercy is very auspicious and as ignorant as we are , they can show guidance in the darkness of ignorance.

    Like

  34. It is said that — Neither by actions nor by doing charity does one attain Moksha, but only by knowledge (jnana) only.

    One should think for oneself what is true .
    Start by thinking what is not true . What is truth?
    truth is that which is unchanged by time. It is the same in past, present and future.
    what is it that is changed by time ? and what is not changed by time ?
    why are people different . what makes them dfferent. is it the experinces of life. if so, then everybody has had their experiences as well. are they all correct then or is everyone in illusion of being correct.

    what am i reading. why am i reading. how many times have i done such a thing before. even after so many times i am still searching for something. why am i not convinced ever. one target after another.

    One life I know of and i’m wasting it doing repetitive things.
    It is my right to know of myself, of my body.

    what am i thinking, why am i thinking, why am i always thinking one thing or another, good or bad .
    why don’t these thoughts listen to me and stop if i want them to stop .

    who am i . where do i live?
    in the house? no
    in the attraction to girls/others, in thoughts of bedding others, in hunger, in thirst, in anger, grief, depression, happiness ?? – No ,because i am still there when these feelings are not there. these feelings come and go but i remain.
    I was there when i was a child. i did not like women then.
    i am here as adult . i like women now.
    i will be there when old. i may like children then.
    So, I’m not in the liking , but these likings are because of me. They originate from me.

    Am I the mind that originates them. make my body follow. But how an I be mind because in deep sleep
    mind is not there but still i am there. I can say so after waking that i had a very good dreamless sleep.
    I had that experience.
    Also if I were mind, then how is it that i know what the mind is thinking. how am i observing it. Who is it that is observing, watching what the mind is doing.
    Am I this Observer?? How should I verify it. ??

    The whole unverse is based upon distinction, comparison . Earth is small beacause Sun is big, Earth is big because moon is small. Why is poop and piss bad . Disgusting to think as it may be. but truth be true. Why is it that poop and piss are offending to me. why am i disturbed by them. why do i find them disgusting. It sure wasn’t disturbing when I ate that pizza and drank that juice.
    It wasn’t disgusting when I went to mosque or temple with it in my belly .
    People are ready to kill for food and water, but are disturbed by mere sight of poop and piss as if it is some kind of a blasphemy. what is truth??
    It takes effort to accept the truth disturbiung it may seem. truth is truth. However much I would like to deny it but i will only manippulate myself and devite from truth.
    Everything in existence thoughts,likings, objects, poops, swamps, gods demons us… are all prevaded by brahman (parabrahma) . we call him atman, supreme soul, bliss (shiva).
    Nothing in existence is devoid of him. He is ever present. He is the gos and demons . he is the law of Karma that does not distinguish between anyone. He gives boons even to the demons if they show appropriate efforts to achieve something.
    He has divided himself in conciousness, matter, created bodies, ignorance, and entered himself in them to enjoy the fruits of desire and experience yet he is ever present in universe in form of conciousness.
    Even on a spaceship if a child is born he is not devoid of intellegence, ignorance, mind and conciousness.
    Hearing, Knowing. Understanding,and ultimately Realizing are different things.
    It is said that HE WHO KNOWS SELF KNOWS ATMAN KNOWS BRAHMAN AND THERE IS NOTHING UNACHIEVABLE FOR HIM IN THIS WORLD NOR WORLDS BEYOND.

    Like

  35. In Bhahwata Puran also the story is stated about Lakshmidevi’s unhappiness with Vishnu because Vishnu told her that in his half area of heart is dedicated to Lord Shiva only. And in the rest of half, all the creatures of world and all deities including her wife Lakshmi lives. plz dont make it as a business. there nothing without lord shiva.

    Like

    • dont spread wrong news here shiva devotees are demons ravan, hiranyakashyap, hiranyaksha, banausra, jarasanda ,all demons are shiva devotees shiva gave boons to many demons but all demons are killed by lord vishnu we are living in earth because of vishnu in varaha avatar vishnu killed hiranyaksha and he saved the earth so only lord vishnu is supreme god

      Like

      • Shiva says to Parvati in Padma Purana that it is Vishnu who made him put up these garments to attract demons since they won’t get boons from him and he did. It is all play of Vishnu.

        Like

  36. I think people should work towards being unified despite their differences in thier belifs for preservation and expansion of sanaatana dharma… Because if we fight within ourselves eventually abrahamic religions will take over and humanity as we know it will meet its end. I feel it must be the effect of kali that is making learned people fight against each other for nonsensical reasons instead of focussing all their energies to solve real problems in life… Peace.

    Like

  37. Dear Hare Krishna Revolution,

    Hare Krishna! firstly I am a devotee of Shiva but I love Krishna in my heart and I do attend Bhagavad Gita discourses on a timely basis. I chant the Panshakshara and the Hare Krishna Maha Mantra without fail. I read various Vaishnava & Shaiva texts.

    I would like to re-quote from the phrase by Krishna himself “says in the Bhagavad Gita (10.2), aham adir hi devanam: I am the source of all the devas (demigods).” and also another phrase from chapter 10, Text 24 senaninam aham skandah
    sarasam asmi sagarah; of all commanders I am; skandaḥ, Kārtikeya.

    The Lord Himself have showed his Viswaroopa, the universal form to Arjuna where to indicate and enlighten him that he is source of everything, includes various deities,Devas, Bhotas, Saints, animals, other beings and planets (cosmos).

    Lord Krishna continue to state that He accepts any kind of devotion towards him in any kind of form and worship as long with pure devotion. Hence I don’t see anything to argue and indicate which deity/religious group is superior then the other?

    However, I should agree that some of these temples and priests are just taking advantage of this and installing various deities as source of incomes or business, but they are using this truth as an opportunity and confusing the devotees.

    “Lokah samastah sukhino bhavantu”

    May peace and truth prevail throughout the universe!

    Aum Tat Sat

    Nimal Arulanantha

    Like

  38. To say that Lord Shivas devotees get ONLY material benedictions is blasphemous. You wldn be wrong though to say krsnas devotees get a purely spiritual benediction.

    Like

  39. ISKCON and Gaudiya Vaishnavaites are disgrace to Hinduism. You Guys are worshiping Vishnu by thinking him as Krishna. Ok, no problem, God doesn’t have any name, and it doesn’t matter. But don’t make Sanatana Dharma a monotheistic Religion like Abrahamic faiths. You guys are so lame and you believe in Barhama Vaivarta Purana, which is just interpolation. You guys incite wars between Shiva and Vishnu. You Guys are shallow and you lame people divide Hindus by demeaning Shiva and his family. I heart of Vishnu resides Shiva and in heart of Shiva resides Vishnu. You lame people think krishna is superior. A die hard devotee of Krishna started this movement and you sick people believe him. Did you forget teachings of Swami Vivekananda and Adi Shanakra? You guys suffer and never reach reach Hari or Krishna for demeaning Shiva. Brahman is one and He/She/It has no name and Gender.

    Like

    • you just shut your mouth iam not follower of isckon iam south indian brahmin but this is truth lord vishnu is supreme god shiva is not supreme north indians dont know anything about hindusim

      Like

    • MAHAPRABHU AT BHUBANESWAR
      This is also Siva’s dham. Here this Bhubaneswar ksetra is also Siva’s dham. It is said there, in Caitanya Bhagabat, Sri Vrndaban das Thakur has mentioned Bhubaneswar. When Sriman Mahaprabhu came here, while he was going to th Puri Dham He passed through this Bhubaneswar. So Sriman Mahaprabhu visited that Temple, and that Bhubaneswar Lingaraja is a very dear serviant of Anantadeva, therefore Mahaprabhu came here.
      In Caitanya Bhagabat, it is mentioned, ‘Sriman Mahaprabhu with his devotees, chanted and danced before Lord Siva here in Bhubaneswar Temple.’ So following in the footsteps of Sriman Mahaprabhu all Vaisnavas came here and visited Iswara Siva, and chanted and danced there.

      In Skanda Purana, there it is mentioned about this ksetra, Bhubaneswar ksetra. “Once in Kasi, there was a king who was a great devotee of Lord Siva. But his desires were not fulfilled. That king underwent very severe penances to conquer Krishna.He was in tapasya trying to satisfy Lord Siva, and he had that desire he would conquer Krishna. But one cannot understand the behaviour of a Vaisnava. Even the demi-gods can’t understand, what to speak of the human beings. So Sivaji became satisfied, pleased with his tapasya. At that time Sivaji told him, “alright, you go and fight against krishna, I’m following you, I’ll support you, I’ll help you.”
      So that king then started for battle and Lord Siva with all his followers followed him, that raja, king. Then Krishna – Vasudeva, Devaki-nandana the Son of Devaki – could understand all these things, so He released His Sudarsana cakra. That Sudarsana cut off the head of the king, first. After that, also that Sudarsana cakra cut off the heads of all the Siva bhaktas in Kasi. This Varanasi became a crematorium ground, all dead. So Lord Siva became very angry and released his pasupatastra. But what he’ll do, pasupatastra in front of Sudarsana? Couldn’t do anything. So at last Siva also became very much terrified, frightened, and tried to run away, but where will he go?
      Then Siva could understand except for Krishna nobody can save me now. So he surrendered unto the lotus feet of Krishna, Govinda. He offered many prayers. Lord Siva offered prayers to Krishna, Govinda. Siva says, “O Lord of my heart, I have one prayer. I am always very puffed up. I have great false ego, but now I understand I can not leave you, I can not stay anywhere else, please tell me where I shall stay.” According to Skanda Purana (Sri Vrndabandas Thakur has written that thing in Sri Caitanya Bhagabat.)

      EKAMRA KANAN
      So Lord Vasudeva says, “My ksetra is there, Purosottama Ksetra, so in the north of that ksetra there is Ekamra Kanana. That place, Ekamra Kanana is a very very auspicious place, which can give bhukti and mukti, a very nice beautiful place. So you’ll stay there and you’ll be noted as “Bhubaneswar.” “So I give you that Ekamra Kanana, you go and stay there and you become guard of that ksetra, ‘Ksetra Pala’.”

      So this is Bhubaneswar. It is known as ‘Hemacala’ and ‘Svarnadi Ksetra’ also. In this ksetra crores, crores, koti lingum, crores.of Sivajis are here. Asta Tirtha, the famous eight tirthas are also here. It is superior to Varanasi, this Bhubaneswar, and this is more dear to Lord Siva than Varanasi, this Bhubaneswar.
      In Svarnadi Mahadev Grantha, we’ll find once Vyasadev came here. This is Vaisnava ksetra, Ekamraka Kanana, and Vyasadev has described its glories, it is mentioned in Svarnadi Mahadeva Grantha.

      PARVATI AT BHUBANESWAR
      There it is mentioned once Devi Bhagabati, this means Goddess Parvati, was hearing the glories of this Ekamraka Kanana from the lips of Lord Siva, Sambhu. So Bhagabati devi came here to see this ksetra. She saw Maha-linga, do you understand “linga?” Siva is worshipped in Linga form. And that Linga has the complexion of half white, half black, sitasita varna, Maha-Linga,and Devi also offered puja to that Linga. Once Devi saw that from a lake hundreds of cows were coming out, and they were pouring milk from their udders onto that Maha-Linga, circumambulating that Maha-Linga and then going away. Devi saw this thing.
      Another day also she saw the same thing. Then Devi assumed the form of a gopali-ni, a cowherd girl, and followed those cows. At that time there were two demon brothers named Kriti and Vasa. They were very much enchanted by the beauty of Parvati devi, so they approached her and expressed their desire that they wanted to have her as their wife. So Bhagabati devi disappeared from that place and went to Lord Siva and narrated everything before her Lord. Lord Siva then assumed the form of a gopa, a cowherd boy, and went there. Then Lord Siva could understand the history of those two demons.
      Lord Siva revealed that those two demons Kriti and Vasa were the sons of Drumilla Raksasa. So that Drumilla worshipped many demi-gods, they were very much pleased and gave him one boon that his two sons couldn’t be killed by any weapon. Then Sivaji said, “Now they will be killed by you, O Devi. You kill them. They won’t be killed by any weapons, so I can’t kill them.”
      So getting the instruction from Sivaji, Devi, who was in the form of a cowherd girl, gopalini, came in front of those two demons and said, “Alright, I’ll fulfill your desires, but I have one condition, if one of you carry me on your shoulder or head I’ll be his wife.”
      Bhagabati Devi manifested her potency and placed one of her feet on the shoulder of one demon, and the other on the shoulder of the other demon, and crushed them, they were killed. At that time Bhagabati assumed the form of Visvambari, Visvambari rupa. Visva means universe, she expanded as Visvambari and crushed them. So from this day, this Sambhu, “vaisnava pravara sambhu,” and Devi Bhagabati stayed here in this ksetra of Ekamraka Kanana.

      BINDU SAROVARA
      After killing these two demons Krit and Vasa, Bhagabati devi became very tired and was also very thirsty. She wanted water, so Siva with his trident, trishula pierced a hill top and a great well was created that’s known as “Sankar Vampi”(?)
      But Devi said, “I want water from a great tank, sarovara, pond, which will be eternally there.”
      So Sivaji ordered his bull carrier, Nandi, to install that sarovara. All tirthas came there, and all the holy rivers, like Kaveri, Gomati, Krishna, Yamuna, Sarasvati, Gandaki, Rishikulya, Mahanadi, all holy rivers came here. Again from the heavenly planets and from Patala came the Mandakini and Ksirodaka, all came here. When Lord Siva saw all those holy rivers had come, with his trident he pierced that hill top and asked all those holy rivers and all the tirthas to please pour water drop by drop here. (Drop means ‘bindu’.) So they did it and Lord Brahma installed that sarovara. And that sarovara is known as ‘Bindu sarovara.’ Mahaprabhu took bath in that Bindu sarovara.

      Bhagavan Janardan and all demigods headed by Brahma all took bath there in that sarovara. So in this way Bindu sarovara was installed.
      Then Sambhu paid obeisances to Lord Janardana and The Lord placed Anantadeva on the eastern side of Bindu sarovara. You’ll find on the eastern side Ananta Vasudeva is there. Siva became Ksetrapala, and Anantadeva became the controller of the Ksetra. Here Anantadeva stays with His sister, Subhadradevi. He is known as Lord Vasudeva, who has been fulfilling Lord Siva’s desires. To fulfill Lord Siva’s desires Ananta Vasudeva stayed on the eastern side of Bindu sarovara and has been staying there till now. Have you gone to that temple? So in the front wall of that temple you’ll find there is Laxmidevi, and Sudarsana Cakra is also there.
      Ananta Vasudeva and Madana Mohana, They are the Lords of Lingaraja Siva. So at the time of Candrana Yatra, Sivaji along with Ananta Vasudeva and Madana Mohana ride a swing, dola, and go to Candana Yatra. They make Candana Yatra in Bindu sarovara. At that time also Candana Yatra will begin from Puri Temple. In Puri there are three famous Sivas, they also come with Madan Mohan to do Candana Yatra. The Madana Mohana here in Bhubaneswar is a four handed form.
      In Ananta Vasudeva Mandir Vaisnavi Bhagavati herself cooks bhoga to serve for Ananta Vasudeva. First Ananta Vasudeva will be worshipped, bhoga arati will be there, then that bhoga will go to the Siva Temple and Siva always is in need of that prasad of Ananta Vasudeva, he becomes very pleased. This is the vaisnava process. The vaisnava will first worship Lord Visnu, then he’ll offer that prasad to Siva. In this way a vaisnava worships Siva, but if one is not a vaisnava then he’ll directly worship Siva. Therefore a vaisnava never accepts such prasad.
      The vaisnava will worship first Lord Vasudeva, Visnu, and offer bhoga, then that prasad will be offered to Lord Siva. This system is going on in Jagannath Temple. In Jagannath Temple in the campus you’ll find Goddess Durga is there, Siva is there, all are there so Laxmiji is there. So Jagannath prasad goes there, no Siva prasad. That’s the vaisnava process, so we accept it.
      If someone takes bath in Bindu sarovara then he’ll get the result of taking bath in all tirthas, because all tirthas are there. If someone goes to Ananta Vasudeva Temple, and gets darshan of Ananta Vasudeva, then he gets result of darshan of the Supreme Lord.

      So Lord Siva by the order of Janardana, by the mercy of Janardana has become ksetrapala. Siva simultaneously is ‘Bhakti pradatah,’ he is a great vaisnava so he can give you bhakti if he is pleased and also give you the adhikar to serve the dhama of The Lord. Dhama seva adhikar and bhakti pradatah. Lord Siva can give you. Therefore
      the vaisnavas go to the temple of Sivaji, because Sriman Mahaprabhu has also gone there, and we follow in the footsteps of Mahaprabhu. The vaisnavas, gaura priya, dear devotees of Gauranga also visit the Siva temples and pay respects to Siva, and pray for the mercy of Lord Siva that let us get Krishna bhakti. Therefore Mahaprabhu visited. “Lord Siva is a vaisnava, ‘vaisnava sevana, Krishna pujana,’ if a vaisnava is served, then Krishna is worshipped. That is Mahaprabhu’s instruction. So Mahaprabhu did that in order to teach us.

      devotee – I also heard that the Srimad Bhagavatam was first spoken at Bhubaneswar

      Srila Gour Govinda Swami – Yes, in that Ekamra Kanana. Sivaji was speaking to Parvati devi. That we have mentioned in the booklet, brochure that was published at the time of the Temple inaugaration, glorifying this ksetra, Ekamra Kanana, this Bhubaneswar.

      Sivaji savs:-
      ” aham vedmi suko vetti, vyaso vetti na vetti va,
      bhaktya bhagavatam grahyam, na buddhya na ca tikaya.”
      ” I know Bhagavata, Sukadeva knows , I don’t know if Vyasadeva knows or not. Bhagavata can only be understood by bhakti.”

      Lord Siva was speaking Bhagavata before his wife, the Goddess Parvati, here in this Ekamraka Kanana. At that time, a parrot was listening, ‘suka’ means parrot. So at first Parvati devi was listening and was saying, “Hmm, hmm, hmm,(means yes, yes). Then Parvati fell asleep. That suka, parrot, was listening, and the parrot was saying Hmm, hmm, hmm. So Sivaji couldn’t understand at first, then at last Sivaji noticed that Parvati had fallen asleep. So he thought who was saying, ‘Hmm, hmm, hmm.’ He saw a parrot is there, and Sivaji ran and the parrot flew away. That suka then entered into the womb of Vyasadev’s wife. That became Sukadeva Goswami. Therefore Sukadeva knows the Bhagavatam.
      This is such a famous place, this Bhubaneswar dham, ksetra. This is Vaisnava ksetra.

      Like

      • Devotee: Why are there so many conflicting ideas for the ISKCON movement?

        Gour Govinda Swami: Bah, stop it! There is no conflict. No conflict. No conflict. You are a mad fellow. There is no conflict, no confusion. It is all clear, bābā. Conflict and confusion are within you. Therefore you see conflict. If you put on yellow glasses, everything looks yellow. A man sees the reflection of his mind. In your mind there is conflict and confusion, and therefore you see it outside.

        When Hanuman went to Ravana’s capital Lanka, he was extremely angry because the demon Ravana had kidnapped his master’s wife, Sita. Out of anger, Hanuman’s eyes were red hot. Ravana had kept Sita in a very lovely garden, called the Ashok Van. Aśoka means, “no lamentation”. That garden was extremely beautiful. Ravan had brought so many varieties of nice flowers, fruits, and birds from the heavenly planets. In that garden were many wonderful ponds and springs. Hanuman went there, but he saw no variety. He saw everything red, because anger was inside him. His eyes were red hot. Do you understand? Are your doubts clear?

        Devotee: No.

        Gour Govinda Swami: No? Why not?

        Devotee: For instance, when Srila Prabhupada was directly present, everything in ISKCON was under his direction.

        Gour Govinda Swami: He is still directing, but you can’t see it. You have no vision. It will take time for you to understand. Be patient and wait, wait, wait. All these problems are inside you. The conflict is within you. Therefore you see such things outside.
        — From a lecture in Bhubaneswar on 23 March 1993

        Like

  40. Hi ALL,
    ultimate word are satyam shivam sundaram means truth is GOD(Shiva) and shiva is beautiful.the whole world become very soon shivoham means beautiful. Shiva and Vishnu are same.Iskon are fake. Lord krishna is an incarnation of vishnu. As Sadasiva and Mahavishnu are same and krishna is an incarnation of vishnu, or mahavishnu, krishna and shiva also same. they lord of each other and also devotee of each other. HariHara or ShankarNarayana are prabrahm. the combination form of shiva and vishnu. The supreme is ShankarNarayana. or HariHara. Om prabrahm Prameshwara Shivaya Namah, Om prabrahm Paramatma Narayana Namah, om prabrahm Parampeeta Brahma Namah. Om Prabrahm maa adishakti namah.
    Lord Krishna

    Like

  41. i have a humble request to this blog members instead of comparing gods post the greatness of lord krsna if you want to promote his supremacy.it’s not a dignified way to spread the devotion.find a better way for getting positive comments

    Like

  42. all shiva devotees listen here- shiva devotees are demons ravan is shiva dveotee vishnu avtar ram killed ravan, hiranyakashyap is shiva devotee narasimha killed hiranyakashyap, hiranyaksha is shiva devotee varaha killed hiranyaksha, kumbhakarna is shiva devotee ram killed kumbhakarna our lord vishnu killed so many shiva devotees in is avatars but your shiva never killed single vishnu devotees jarasanda is shiva devotee bhima is vishnu devotee bhima killed jarasanda your shiva failed to save his devotees thirupathi is world richest vishnu temple even his temple is more powerful than other gods so only lord vishnu is supreme god

    Like

  43. Shame to those who say they r the devotee n publish such post which shows superiority! this is an absolute failure of religion.. quit ur religion when u cannot learn what its tryana teach u or else ask to urself if ur religion is teaching u domination or
    equality!! U r posting such just to prove ur God superior..? we ve got nth to do wid it. Therez only one God. All r His manifestation.. take Him as Shiva or Krishna or Bishnu, the ultimate goal is to teach u morales… which is totally absent in u. so plz learn positive frm religion.. not the discrimination n superiority it teaches

    Like

    • HAHAHA……”We should not disrespect the demi-gods. Though the demi-gods are not the Supreme Lord, they are the servants of Krishna. So Mahaprabhu has taught this thing. And especially Lord Siva, “Vaisnavanam yatha sambhu,” Siva is a bhakta. Therefore, Sriman Mahaprabhu visited, paid respect. And Sivaji is “ksetra-pala,” he who guards the ksetra.
      In Vraja Mandala you’ll find nine Ksetrapala Mahadeva murtis are there. In Vrndaban there is Gopesvara Mahadev, in Kamyavan you’ll find Kamesvara Mahadeva, in .. you’ll find Chakresvara Mahadeva, in Nandagram you’ll find Nandisvara, and in Mathura you’ll find Bhutesvara , Gokarnesvara, Chaklesvara and Rangesvara. Besides that, in Mathura there are many, many other Siva Temples.

      In the Varaha Purana it is mentioned that Lord Visnu said to Sivaji, in Mathura you’ll become Ksetrapala, who guards ksetra, My ksetra. If someone will pay you respect, have your darshan, he’ll get the result of visiting My home. Those who do circumambulation, parikrama, Vrndaban parikrama at the end they visit Bhutesvara Siva in Mathura. Because ‘vaisnavanam yatha sambhu,’ Siva is a great Vaisnava, do you understand?

      Like

  44. Haha

    Can you answer a few questions please
    1) Why do you worship krishna when he is actually an incarnation of vishnu.
    2) Ram is also considered and avatar of vishnu but he used to worship shiva, why so.
    3) Curd is actually way better at curing stomach problems than milk. So if i go according to your logical thinking curd is better than milk.
    4) Bhagwata Gita talk about purification of the mind right. Now by your thoughts that is trying to prove others beliefs inferior and yours superior does it not increase EGO. Something i think gita does not subscribe to. Whenever indra had a superiority feeling you know what happened right. Same with duryodhana. Arent you going in similar direction 🙂
    5) Why vishnu is small god in vedas while gods like indra,vayu etc get more importance. Shiva is not mentioned but he has more mention than vishnu in the form of rudra.
    6) Shiva is the god who symbolizes meditation & Yoga if you compare all the Gods. Isnt it the same what bhagwata gita trying to tell you to do.
    You forget Lord Krishna greatest teaching in doing all this, that is love.
    Vishnu & Shiva are forms just for your understanding of the divine who is formless.

    Like

    • kranti-krishna and vishnu both are same we should worship vishnu and all his incarnations rama worshipped shiva only to mislead and delude the tamasic souls there are 3 types of souls satvika, rajasika, tamasika, some times vishnu and his incarnations worship shiva only to delude and mislead tamasic souls because vishnu hates tamasic souls and tamasic people and bhima is krishna devotee bhima killed duryodhana dont forget that vishnu is not small god go and read vedas again purusha sukta also praises vishnu all devtas are devotees of vishnu hanuman, garuda, adi shesha, prahalda saraswati, ahalya, draupadi, yama, narada, indra, all are devotees of vishnu thirupathi is world famous vishnu temple, sri rangam is world biggest vishnu temple, kerala padmanabha is world richest vishnu temple even his temple is more powerful than other gods so only lord vishnu is supreme god this my reply to you.

      Like

  45. There is no one like sadashiva. The supreme of supreme. Lord of lord, the great mahadeva even worshiped by shri Krishna coz Krishna desired to be perfect in all things which is material world. Yes that true lord mahadeva can full fill all materials world desire…but he can give you spiritual knowledge…its depends person to person who worshipping…which types of things he or she desired…..

    Like

    • No prabu….First you should go read the four vedas { yajur, sama,Rig and Atharvana },properly prabhu.Then only you can say’ LORD SADASIVA’, word.Actually You are moving in maya conception.THats why you dont know who are LORD SADASIVA.

      Like

  46. Dear All,
    After watching long discussion I am writing my view
    God is One(source of energy who is running whole universe) but his forms are different.When he creats that form called brahma and when he care and nourish called Vishnu and when he destroy that form is called Sankar/Rudra and we all are the minute particles of same energy(aatma) we have that energy in our body called aatma. and flow of our energy(aatma) is always towards the source (god/Paramatma) speed of flow depends upon the karm and devotion towards source(god) That’s end all the doubts.

    Like

  47. Hara Hara MAHADEV……. OM NAMA SHIVAYA….

    All of you please kept in mind the story of Arrogant DHAKSHA (Great devotee of lord vishnu) and his End.
    May shiva bless you by giving such a boon dear Arrogant VAISHNAVAS 😉

    Like

  48. Hara Hara MAHADEV……. OM NAMA SHIVAYA….

    All of you please kept in mind the story of Arrogant DHAKSHA (Great devotee of lord vishnu) and his End.
    May shiva bless you by giving such a boon dear Arrogant VAISHNAVAS 😉

    Like

  49. This needs to be reviewed. Utter nonsense. Shiva devotee doesn’t turn from a beggar to rich person, such a biast remark. Clearly not enough has been researhed.

    Like

  50. Hahaha…Krishna and Shiva is one…tum Sab ki bahas dekhkar vo dono has rahe honge…karm hi sab kuch hai…meri mom kaheti hai satya ek naam anek…please read shrimad Geeta and Shvetashvatara Upanishad…and mediation daily…question yourself who is supreme? …this conversation is Endless…when krishna or shiva come and say i’m great…so please you are believe in bhagawan…itna hi enough hai…sachha Hindu is tarah ki bahas kar hi nahi sakta…

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s