Re: LORd SIVA : A Gaudiya Vaisnava Perspective

[atanu]

Dear YogKriya,
And a final note... are you aware that to prove Lord Shiva as Supreme, you have to prove Lord Vishnu/Narayana as not Supreme? It is not possible to do this utilizing Veda/Upanishad/Puranas.
Hare Krshna.!
All Glories to Shri Prabhupada

Namaste Bandhu Grames

I hope you will not mind explaining the following translation of Shri Prabhupada (as cited by Shri Yogkriya in his post), in reference to your above call, highlighted with blue fonts above.

From Bhagavatam
O Lord Girîsha, since You are Brahman which is transcendental to the material modes of goodness, passion and ignorance, the various directors of this material world certainly cannot appreciate it or even know where it is. It is not understandable even to Lord Brahmâ, Lord Vishnu or the King of heaven, Mahendra ( SB 8:7:31)

Why this particular translation when the original sanskrit does not name Vishnu as such? Is it political or is it a spiritual requirement as in Puranas that extol a particular trimurti deity to the exclusion of the other two?

While explaining the above, kindly do not ignore the following, paying special attention to the parts highlighted in blue, keeping them together in mind:

"O lord Shiva, you are self-effulgent and supreme. You create this material world by your personal energy, and you assume the names Brahmā, Viṣṇu and Maheśvara when you act in creation, maintenance and annihilation." ( Srimad Bhagavatam 8:7:23 )

" O Lord Shiva, You are the cause of all causes, the self-effulgent, inconceivable, and you are alone that Secret Para Brahman (tvaḿ brahma paramaḿ guhyaḿ )........

................

I will give my undertanding, which I am not imposing on anyone but I wish that these questions must be kept by anyone in mind who argue about Supremacy of Lord, who is inconceivable, even to Prajapatis, including BrahmA and Vishnu. Lord Shiva is talked of as Self effulgent and thus He is not jyoti of any other Source God. He is also called as inconceivable but also creator of this world, including forms and names of the Trimurti. I believe that the trimurti: BrahmA, Vishnu, and Mahendra are the highest Jivas controlling this material existence (one may argue as to who among them is Supreme, but I find it futile because I understand that the Self, the highest above the highest, is actually inconceivable)

As per me and as supported by Bhagavatam and sruti scriptures, the secret Lord is Shiva, who is actually inconceivable because of being transcendental to the senses but His residence in the innermost recesses of every heart. We have discussed many times that Lord Shiva is called patiM patiinaaM paramaM parastaad. And i have requested that someone should show from the Vedas that paramaM parastaad is ever mentioned for Vishnu and/or Narayana.

I again believe that the name Shiva, the auspicious, itself is enough without any other proof or verbal gymnastics, to understand Him as THE Paramatman (as spoken of Him by the Prajapatis).

I do not require that you or anyone agree to the above belief. But I request you to please keep all these in mind, while explaining the below:

O Lord Girîsha, since You are Brahman which is transcendental to the material modes of goodness, passion and ignorance, the various directors of this material world certainly cannot appreciate it or even know where it is. It is not understandable even to Lord Brahmâ, Lord Vishnu or the King of heaven, Mahendra ( SB 8:7:31).

I hope you will not take offence at this small question.

Om Namah Shivaya

All glories to that inconceivable Heart, which is also the Universe and its controllers.

[Yogkriya]

I am reading this more and more and it is causing me to question whether I have started upon the right path. I definitely am not interested in debating or even having an opinion on "Which God is better".. I know that Krishna is my God, and that's good enough for me. (the Sesame Street song C is for Cookie is stuck in my head now!)

I guess it would be useful for me to learn as much as possible while still listening to what my heart tells me on this.. it can be confusing..

If KRISHNA is your God and that's good enough for you, then there is no other question. Follow him with ALL YOUR HEART. Its the right path for you!! Have no doubts!

[Yogkriya]

I SALUTE YOU !!!!!!!!! Great work cos it is TRUE !!!!!!!!!

God Bless you dear Giridhar!
All glories to the great Lord Shiva - one without a beginning or an end!

[Jogesh]

grames,

you sure wander all over the place not making direct points...

Sorry if this seems like an attack, but I also find you to be extremely condescending on pretty much any thread I have read by you...
why you gaudiyas think your the end all be all is beyond me, your Chaitanya was an Advaitin mixed with devotion to Krishna..

namaskar

[AhamAtma]

Because, that Rudra is Lord Vishnu - that Vishnu, the Sri Pati is always supreme. That vishnu, who is laying on the Sesha is always Supreme. Oh. Mr YogKriya, why don't you learn the vast wisdom first before entering in to the VidyaSabha of greats? [/FONT][/COLOR]Svetasvatara upanishad is in fact Vaishnava upanishad but you may not have learnt the actual meanings - with grammar correctness from any Vaishnava scholar so why this unfortunate arrogance. Reading translations of some "Ananda"s will take away your eternal "Ananda" permanently and be aware of that. [COLOR=Black][FONT=Arial]

Dear Mr.Grames,

What's your intention behind your words? Do you mean to say that Rishi Svetasvatara originally worshiped Vishnu but never Shiva ? Do you mean to say that Rudra of Svetasvatara Upanishad is not really Lord Shiva ? If that was your intention then i really pity your ignorance. I personally never see any difference between Lord Shiva and Lord Vishnu. They are just two different names of Brahman/Atman. The Shvetasvatara Upanishad is not your so-called Vaishnava Upanishad. Why do you undermine Lord Shiva & Rishi Svetasvatara with your ignorance ? If you want to visualize, for the sake of Upasana, Rudra of Svetasvatara upanishad in form of Vishnu then it's your choice. But with your Vaishnavite grammar jugglery never try to malign Lord Shiva and hurt the heart of Rishi Svetasvatara, the great Rudra Bhakta.


Just like you Some(not all) vaishnavas are over enthusiastic and try to claim that Rishi Svetasvatara was not a worshipper of Lord Shiva. They even say that Rishi Svetasvatara used the word 'Rudra' as an epithet of Lord Vishnu but not to refer 'Rudra' ( a demi-god in their view) of vedas. But such useless ramblings only bring disgrace to the vaishnava sect. A careful analysis of both Śvetāśvatara Upanishad and vedas prove beyond any reasonable doubt that the Rudra of Śvetāśvatara Upanishad and the Rudra of Vedas are one and the same. it is really foolish to think that Rishi Svetasvatara used the word 'Rudra' to refer someone else other than vedik Rudra.


Rudra of Śvetāśvatara Upanishad is none other than Rudra of vedas.

Actually, most of the people do not know the fact that several mantras used in Śvetāśvatara Upanishad were actually adapted from Veda samhitas. That's why the Śvetāśvatara Upanishad is popular as 'Mantra Upanishad' . The hymns in praise of Rudra in Śvetāśvatara Upanishad were actually taken from Samhita portions of Rigveda, Yajurveda, and Atharvana Veda.


1)

yo devo agnau yo’psu
yo viśvaṃ bhuvanam āviveśa
ya oṣadhīṣu yo vanaspatiṣu
tasmai devāya namo namaḥ ( Śvetāśvatara Upanishad II-17 )


The Self—luminous Lord, who is fire, who is in water, who has entered into the whole world, who is in plants, who is in trees— to that Lord let there be adoration! Yea, let there be adoration!


The above mantra was actually adapted from Yajurveda Taittiriya Samhita. The verse is addressed to Rudra. The verse describes the omnipresence of Lord Rudra. It says that Rudra is the indweller of elements of nature and beings as well. So it is clear that the Rudra of Śvetāśvatara Upanishad is none otherthan lord Rudra of Vedas.

Adapted from:

Yo rudro agnau yo apsu ya oshhadhishhu
Yo rudro vishva bhuvanaaavivesha tasmai rudraya namo astu (YV 5:5:9-i )

MEANING: The Rudra in the fire, in the waters, in the plants, the Rudra that hath entered all beings, to that Rudra be homage.



2)

eko hi rudro na dvitīyāya tasthur
ya imāṃl lokān īśata īśanībhiḥ
pratyaṅ janāṃs tiṣṭhati sañcukocānta-kāle
saṃsṛjya viśvā bhuvanāni gopāḥ ( SV Up III-2)

Meaning : Rudra is truly one; for the knowers of Brahman do not admit the existence of a second, He alone rules all the worlds by His powers. He dwells as the inner Self of every living being. After having created all the worlds, He, their Protector, takes them back into Himself at the end of time.


The above verse clearly says that Rudra is truly one. Rishi Svetasvatara reasserts "Ekam eva advitiyam Brahma". This verse which proclaims the absoluteness of Lord Rudra was also adapted from Taittiriya samhita. The verse clearly refutes the vaishnavite claims that Rudra is a demi-god and subordinate to Vishnu. Lord Rudra is not a demi god but lord Rudra is Absolute brahman who is beyond the comprehension of human minds. Vedas testify the absoluteness of Lord Rudra. This verse also makes it clear that Rudra of Śvetāśvatara Upanishad is none otherthan lord Rudra of Vedas.

Adapted from:

Eka eva rudra na dvitīyāya tasthur ( Yajurveda 1:8:6 d)

ie., Rudra is truly one for the knowers of Brahman do not admit the existence of a second.



3)

viśvataś cakṣur uta viśvato-mukho
viśvato-bāhur uta viśvatas-pāt
saṃ6 bāhubhyāṃ dhamati sampatatrair
dyāv-ābhūmī janayan deva ekaḥ ( Sv Up III-3)

His eyes are everywhere, His faces everywhere, His arms everywhere, everywhere His feet. He it is who endows men with arms, birds with feet and wings and men likewise with feet. Having produced heaven and earth, this God (deva ekaḥ) remains as their non—dual manifester.



yā te rudra śivā tanūr aghorā’pāpa-kāśinī
tayā nas tanuvā śantamayā giriśantābhicākaśīh ( Sv Up III-5)

Lord Rudra, you who dwell on Mount Kailas and who confer happiness, by that
form of yours which is not terrible, which will not injure us, and which is highly
auspicious, behold and illuminate us.


The above verse of Svetasvatara upanishad asks Rudra to shower his blessings in auspicious form. This verse is like a jolt upon those vaishnavas who claim that Rudra of svetasvatara upanishad is different from Rudra of vedas whom the advaitins and Shaivates worship. This verse is taken 'AS-IT-IS' from the popular Sri Rudram portion of Yajurveda. The Vaishnavites often say that Rudra,who is worshiped by Advaitins and shaivates by chanting Rudram, is a demi-god and subordinate to Vishnu. So they say that the Rudra of Śvetāśvatara upanishad is Vishnu but not Rudra of Shaivates. Such senseless claims of vaisnavas are rebutted by this verse. If Śvetāśvatara maharshi's Rudra is different from Shaivates' Rudra then why did he take this mantra "AS-IT-IS" from Sri Rudram ? if Śvetāśvatara maharshi want to distinguish between his Rudra and Shaivates' Rudra then he wouldn't have quoted from Sri Rudram at all.


Adapted from:

yā te rudra śivā tanūr aghorā’pāpa-kāśinī
tayā nas tanuvā śantamayā giriśantābhicākaśīh ( YV Taittiriya Samhita IV-5-1-c)



4)

yābhiṣuṃ giriśanta haste bibharṣy astave
śivāṃ giritra tāṃ kuru mā hiṃsīḥ puruṣaṃ jagat ( SV Up III-6)


My Lord who dwells on Mount Kailas and confers gladness to all! You, who fulfills your vow of protecting all who serve you and take refuge in you; that arrow of yours which you hold ready to let fly, withhold it and make it tranquil and auspicious.


The above verse is once again a jolt upon such vaishnavas. Because this verse is also taken 'AS-IT-IS' from Sri Rudram portion of yajurveda. If Śvetāśvatara maharshi's Rudra is different from Shaivates' Rudra then why did he take this mantra "AS-IT-IS" from Sri Rudram ? if Śvetāśvatara maharshi want to distinguish between his Rudra and Shaivates' Rudra then he wouldn't have quoted from Sri Rudram at all. Of course, there are a category of vaishnavas who conveniently changes their color just like chameleon. They argue that the Sri Rudram portion of Vedas are refering to Narayana but not Rudra of Shaivates. This is really a funny claim. it is something similar like 'Vishnu of vaishnavas is not same as Vishnu of Vishnu puran or pancharatra agama'. The shaivates are not bothered about any other Rudra whom the Vaishnavites are referring to. For Shaivates, God is 'Rudra' who is eulogized in Sri Rudram, Who is eulogized in Rigveda samhita with name 'Rudra', Who is eulogized in Atharvana veda with names 'Rudra' 'Sarva' Bhava' 'vratya' skambha...etc, Who is eulogized in Brahmanas as 'Mahadeva' , Who is eulogized in Aranyakas, who is eulogized in kena upanishad as Lord of Uma hymavati (umapati). who is eulogized as 'Maheswara', 'Parameswara', 'iswara' , 'Hara', 'Shiva' 'Ishana' in Svetasvatara upanishad. Shaivates are unaware of any other 'Rudra' whom these vaishnavas are referring.

Adapted from :

yābhiṣuṃ giriśanta haste bibharṣy astave
śivāṃ giritra tāṃ kuru mā hiṃsīḥ puruṣaṃ jagat ( YV Taittiriya samhita IV-5-1 d)


5)

tvaṃ strī pumān asi
tvaṃ kumāra uta vā kumārī
tvaṃ jīrṇo daṇḍena vañcasi
tvaṃ jāto bhavasi viśvato-mukhaḥ ( SV Up IV-3)

Meaning: Thou art a woman, and a man; thou art a damsel and a boy.
Grown old thou totterest with a staff, new-born thou lookest every way.


The above verse describes Lord Rudra as everyone and everything. But this verse is adapted from the Skambha Suktam of Atharvana Veda samhita. 'Skambha' means 'pillar'. Lord Rudra appeared as pillar without begining or ending. Both Hari and Brahma failed to know the origin and end of skambha. 'Linga' is a symbol of Skambha.

Adapted From:

tváṃ strī́ tváṃ púmān asi tváṃ kumārá utá vā kumārī́||
tváṃ jīrṇó daṇḍéna vañcasi tváṃ jātó bhavasi viśvátomukhaḥ (Atharva Veda Śamhita 10,8.27)



6)

yo devānām adhipo
yasmin lokā adhiśritāḥ
ya īśe asya dvipadaś catuṣpadaḥ
kasmai devāya haviṣā vidhema ( SV Up IV-13 )

Meaning:
He who is the sovereign of the gods, in whom the worlds find their support, who rules over all two—footed and four—footed beings—let us serve that God, radiant and blissful, with an oblation.



Here Śvetāśvatara maharshi calls Rudra is called as Lord of both two-footed and four-footed. (ya īśe asya dvipadaś catuṣpadaḥ). This epithet is not a new one. In Veda samhitas, Rudra is always adressed as the lord of both two-footed and four-footed. Rudra is addressed as Lord of two-footed and four-footed for more than 100 times. So from this, it is clear that Rudra of Svetasvatara and Rudra of Vedas are both one and the same.

Adapted from:

bhávāśarvau manvé vāṃ tásya vittaṃ yáyor vām idáṃ pradíśi yád virócate
yā́v asyéśāthe dvipádo yáu cátuṣpadas táu no muñcatam áṃhasaḥ ( Athava veda IV-28-1)

O Bhava and Sarva, I am devoted to you. Take note of that, you under whose control, is all this which shines (the visible universe)! You rule all these two-footed and four-footed creatures, you, Deliver us from grief and trouble.


yáyor vadhā́n nā́papádyate káś canā́ntár devéṣūtá mā́nuṣeṣu
yā́v asyéśathe dvipádo yáu cátuṣpadas táu no muñcatam áṃhasaḥ ( Athava veda IV-28-5)

You from whose blows no one either among gods or men escapes; you who rule all these two-footed and four-footed creatures, deliver us from grief and trouble.



7)

sūkṣmātisūkṣmaṃ kalilasya madhye
viśvasya sraṣṭāram aneka-rūpam
viśvasyaikaṃ pariveṣṭitāraṃ
jñātvā śivaṃ śāntim atyantam eti ( SV Up IV-14 )

Finer beyond fineness. He hath hidden him in the midmost of this hustling chaos. He hath created this universe by taking many figures and as the One He encompasseth it around and girdeth it; having known Shiva, the Blessed One, man goeth to unutterable peace


The above verse explicitly identifies Lord Rudra with Shiva. The words " jñātvā śivaṃ " clearly says that the absolute is to be known or realised as SHIVA.,then only one can have supreme peace. If Lord Rudra is not 'Shiva' of Shaivates then why is Śvetāśvatara Maharshi saying that the absolute is to be known as 'Shiva'. (jñātvā śivaṃ) ?



ghṛtāt paraṃ maṇḍam ivātisūkṣmaṃ
jñātvā śivaṃ sarva-bhūteṣu gūḍham
viśvasyaikaṃ pariveṣṭitāraṃ
jñātvā devaṃ mucyate sarva-pāśaiḥ ( SV Up IV-16)

As the rare and fine cream in clarified butter, and it is richer than the butter, so Shiva the Blessed One hath hidden Him in every one of all His creatures; but as the One He encompasseth this whole world and girdeth it around. Know God and thou breakest every bondage.


Here again Rishi Śvetāśvatara telling us to realise that, it is Shiva who resides in the hearts of all beings. (jñātvā śivaṃ sarva-bhūteṣu gūḍham ).



8)

yadā’tamas tan na divā na rātrir
na san na cāsac chiva eva kevalaḥ
tad akṣaraṃ tat savitur vareṇyaṃ
prajñā ca tasmāt prasṛtā purāṇī (SV Up IV-18)

When there is no darkness of ignorance, there is no day or night, neither being nor non—being; SHIVA alone exists. That immutable Reality is the meaning of "That"; It is adored by the Sun. From It has proceeded the ancient wisdom.


Oh... here once again !! Rishi Śvetāśvatara proclaimed "Shiva eva kevalaḥ" ie., Shiva alone exists. if Svetasvatara Rishi's Lord Rudra is different from the Shiva of Shaivates why is he using the word 'Shiva' again and again ?


9)

ajāta ity evaṃ kaścid bhīruḥ prapadyate
rudra yat te dakṣiṇaṃ mukhaṃ tena māṃ pāhi nityam ( SV Up IV-21)

It is because Thou, O Lord, art birthless, that some rare souls, frightened by birth and death, take refuge in Thee. O Rudra, may Thy benign face protect me for ever!


Here Maharshi Śvetāśvatara says that only rare souls take refuge(prapadyate) of Rudra. He is asking Rudra's bengin face (dakṣiṇaṃ mukhaṃ) to protect forever. Here Rishi takes refugee of Shiva's bengin form ie., Dakshina murthy. Rudra has both Ghora and Aghora forms.

10)

mā nas toke tanaye mā na āyuṣi
mā no goṣu mā na aśveṣu rīriṣaḥ
vīrān mā no rudra bhāmito
vadhīr haviṣmantaḥ sadāmit tvā havāmahe ( SV Up IV-22)


O Rudra, do not, in Thy wrath, destroy our children and grand—children. Do not destroy our lives; do not destroy our cows or horses; do not destroy our strong servants. For we invoke Thee always, with oblations, for our protection.


The above verse is also taken 'AS IT IS' from Sri Rudram portion of Yajurveda. Here Rudra is asked to show mercy upon the progency. It is typical to Rudra in vedas. If Lord Rudra of Svetasvatara maharshi is different from the Rudra of vedas, why has he taken Sri Rudram verse 'AS IT IS' ? So it is very clear that Rudra of Shaivates and Rudra of Svetasvatara Upanishad are one and the same.

Adapted from:

Manastoke tanaye ma na ayushhi ma no goshhu ma no ashveshhu ririshhah
Viranma no rudra bhamitoavadhi rhavishhmanto namasa vidhema te ( Yajur veda TS IV-5-10-f)

Lord Rudra! Getting angry at our transgressions hurts not only our children, oursons in particular, but also our cattle and horses, and our warriors.
Making offerings into the sacred fire, we shall serve and calm you by our
Namaskars (salutations).


Verses which explicitly identifies Lord Rudra with Shaivate names.

kṣaraṃ pradhānam amṛtākṣaraṃ haraḥ ( SV Up I-10)
ie., prakriti is perishable but Hara is imperishable.


jñātvā devaṃ sarva-pāśāpahāniḥ ( SV Up I-11)

jñātvā devaṃ mucyate sarva-pāśaiḥ ( SV Up II- 15 )
By knowing the deity all pashas ie., Bondages will be gone.

ya eko jālavān īśata īśanībhiḥ sarvāṃl lokān īśata īśanībhiḥ ( SV Up III-1)

eko hi rudro na dvitīyāya tasthur ya imāṃl lokān īśata īśanībhiḥ (SV Up III-2)

yo devānāṃ prabhavaś codbhavaś ca
viśvādhipo rudro maharṣiḥ
hiraṇyagarbhaṃ janayāmāsa pūrvaṃ
sa no buddhyā śubhayā saṃyunaktu (SV Up III-4)

yā te rudra śivā tanūr aghorā’pāpa-kāśinī
tayā nas tanuvā śantamayā giriśantābhicākaśīhi (SV Up III-5)

yābhiṣuṃ giriśanta haste bibharṣy astave
śivāṃ giritra tāṃ kuru mā hiṃsīḥ puruṣaṃ jagat (SV Up III-6)

sunirmalām imāṃ prāptim īśāno jyotir avyayaḥ ( SV Up III-12)

sarvasya prabhum īśānaṃ sarvasya śaraṇaṃ bṛhat( SV Up III-17)

māyāṃ tu prakṛtiṃ vidyān māyinaṃ ca maheśvaram ( SV Up IV-10)

tam īśānaṃ varadaṃ devam īḍyaṃ (SV Up IV-11)

ya īśe asya dvipadaś catuṣpadaḥ kasmai devāya haviṣā vidhema ( SV Up IV-13)

jñātvā śivaṃ sarva-bhūteṣu gūḍham ( SV Up IV-16)

na san na cāsac chiva eva kevalaḥ ( SV Up IV-18)

ajāta ity evaṃ kaścid bhīruḥ prapadyate
rudra yat te dakṣiṇaṃ mukhaṃ tena māṃ pāhi nityam ( SV Up IV - 21)

mā nas toke tanaye mā na āyuṣi
mā no goṣu mā na aśveṣu rīriṣaḥ
vīrān mā no rudra bhāmito
vadhīr haviṣmantaḥ sadāmit tvā havāmahe ( SV Up IV-22)

bhāva-grāhyam anīḍākhyaṃ bhāvābhāva-karaṃ śivam ( SV Up V-14)

tam īśvarāṇāṃ paramaṃ maheśvaraṃ ( SV Up VI-7)

ya īśe’sya jagato nityam eva nānyo hetur vidyata īśanāya ( SV Up VI-17)


All the above mentioned verses clearly indicate that Rudra of Svetasvatara Upanishad and Rudra of vedas are one and the same. Rishi Svetasvatara devoted himself heart and soul to Lord Rudra. He was a devotee of Lord Shiva. He worshiped 'Hara'. He surrendered to 'Maheswara'. He took refuge of Ishana alone. By surrendering to Pashupati he broke all Paashaas(Bondage) and finally attained salvation by the grace of Lord Rudra. It is really unfair on the part of Vaishnavas to deny the True heart of Svetasvatara Maharshi.

Svetasvatara worshiped Lord Shiva who is beyond form and name. He did Rudropasana. He meditated on the bengin aspect of Lord Rudra. He realised that all gods including Vishnu were created by Lord Rudra alone. Rudra alone bestowed powers upon the gods. He called Rudra with various names like Shiva,Maheswara,Hara,ishana,pashupati,Parameswara..etc. In the Upanishad , he adapted Sri Rudram mantras. All these things clearly prove beyond any reasonable doubt that Rudra of Svetasvatara upanishad and Rudra of Vedas are one and the same.

trayī sāṃkhyaṃ yogaḥ paśupatimataṃ vaiṣṇavam iti
prabhinne prasthāne param idam adaḥ pathyam iti ca
rucīnāṃ vaicitryād ṛjukuṭilanānāpathajuṣāṃ
nṛṇām eko gamyas tvam asi payasām arṇava iva

"There are different paths of realization as enjoined by the three Vedas, Sānkhyā, Yoga, Pāśupata doctrine and Vaishnava śāstras . Persons following different paths straight or crooked according as they consider that this path is best or that one is proper due to the difference in temperaments, reach Thee alone, O Shiva, just as rivers enter the ocean."


Regards,
AhamAtma


"Seeing the Atman in all beings, and all beings in the Atman, one attains the highest Brahman – not by any other means" (kaivalya upanishad 10 )

[Rasa1976]

your Chaitanya was an Advaitin mixed with devotion to Krishna..

namaskar

This is an interesting claim, in fact I have heard it before. I have even heard it somewhere, "Lord Chaitanya was a Mayavadi".

Do you have a source for this? Even if for whatever reason you want to discount the entire Chaitanya-Charitamrita (which of course is full of stories about Advaitins being "converted"), it still wouldn't tally with Chaitanya supposedly unearthing the Brahma-Samhita. The Brahma-Samhita likely being one of the most difficult texts to facilitate an Advaitic slant.

Thanks.

[grames]

Dear Atanu and Jogesh,

First of all, my apologies if i gave an impression that i am " extremely condescending" with my belief and faith as 'superior' over others. May be it is my flaw and i will surely try to be more polite, focus only on the subject when it is required and pass the little information, understanding that i am given as in sharing. Also, it is necessarily not to bow down like a weak when 'wrong' information is piled on to prove a negative theology and when countering that, the feel you can get is only i am condescending etc. and i do not think anyone can avoid it. When you complain, you are also a subject of complaint too.

There is no offense is raising questions dear Atanu cos i believe it will only help us to know more, understand better and allow us to see the Truth more, provided we are honest, not biased and do not put our ego above the Truths. But, i would like to know what is your "intention" here? To prove Lord Shiva as the Supreme and Lord Vishnu is not in fact Supreme? If know the intention, may be i can engage in a better discussion.

For the subject matter, this particular verse which you have quoted need to be understood with the context ( in fact, vedantic discussion require you to understand the context first before attempting the explanation). This particular chapter is about Lord Shiva drinking the poison that came out as part of churning the milk ocean. Let me give you some pointers and i would like to know what kind of understanding these pointers gives to you and come back and prove your "intention" of what you are trying to achieve or establish by invoking the SB verse 8.7.31?


Let me first jump to chapter 21 of Can:11

māḿ vidhatte 'bhidhatte māḿ vikalpyāpohyate tvaham
etāvān sarva-vedārthaḥ śabda āsthāya māḿ bhidām
māyā-mātram anūdyānte pratiṣidhya prasīdati - 43

Do give a translation and good pointers to understand the above verse. Contextually as well as by the strength of the speaker, the above verse gives the direct knowledge of the Supreme being and His distinction with out doubt for the entire Bagavata. Also the previous verse,

kim´ vidhatte kim acaste
kim anudya vikalpayet
ity asya hrdayam´ loke
nanyo mad veda kascana - 42

and give the importance to the last "na Anya Mad Veda Kascana when you provide the meaning.

Let us look beyond SB for strengthening the above verses purports.

mukhyam cha sarvavEdAnAM tAtparyaM shripatEH paraM |
uthkarshE tu tadanyatra tAtparyaM syAt avAntaram - MahaVaraha Up.

The great and primary purport of all the Vedas is the greatness of Shripathi. Their reference to other matters is only secondary. Who says the above? The Lord in His varaha ( boar) form to His disciple Sage Ribhu. Do you have any better translation for this?

yasminn asankhyeya-visesa-nama-
rupakrtau kavibhih kalpiteyam
sankhya yaya tattva-drsapaniyate
tasmai namah sankhya-nidarsanaya te iti SB 5.18.33

This above sloka is even more descriptive about the forms of Lord and who is in fact called as the Baghvan. Will it help to prove, Lord Vishnu is not supreme?


Om Namo BhagavathE manthralingAya
yaj~na krathavE mahAdhvarAvayyavAya
mahA purushAya nama:karma sukhlAya
thriyugAya namasthE SB 5.18.35

yasyadya asid gun?a-vigraho mahan
vijñana-dhis?n?yo bhagavan ajah? kila
yat-sambhavo 'ham´ tri-vr?ta sva-tejasa
vaikarikam´ tamasam aindriyam´ sr?je
ete vayam´ yasya vase mahatmanah?
sthitah? sakunta iva sutra-yantritah?
mahan aham´ vaikr?ta-tamasendriyah?
sr?jama sarve yad-anugrahad idam SB 5.17.22&23


How can we translate the above verse??


How about the Varaha Puranas Sarama SLokas?

sthithE manasi susvasthE sarIrE sathi yO nara:
dhAthusAmyE sthithE smarthA visvarUpam cha maamajam
tathastham mriyamANam thu kAshtA paashaNa sannibham
aham smarAmi madh bhaktham nayAmi paramAm gathim


Can you explain all the above slokas with proper translations? I will be delighted to know your view but if you skip even one Sloka, then it is obvious that you cannot prove Lord Shiva as Supreme and do accept that as verdict.


There are so many verses in the Shrutis, Sutra and Puranas where you cannot give two different meanings or prove that Lord Shiva as supreme by proving Lord Vishnu as not one which should be met as a must condition for justifying such contention. Dear Atanu, it is not the first time you are throwing this pin thinking what is presented here as mere inflated balloon.
So, my advice for you is to go ahead and continue reading the entire 8th Canto and get to know that, It is by the Mercy of Lord Vishnu, Lord Shiva, His svamsa manifestation gets all the glorification though, the same Lord Shiva remembers who He has to please by saying...


pum´sah? krpayato bhadre
sarvatma priyate hariH
prite harau bhagavati
priye 'ham´ sacaracaraH
tasmad idam´ garam´ bhuñje
prajanam´ svastir astu me -- SB 8.7.40

Do you want to translate this by ignoring hariH with some other meaning?? Who is that Hari? Why Lord Shiva has to consider pleasing Shri Hari?

(Thanks proudVedic - for the note)

In fact, you in some rush or some blind faith still refusing to take the million $ point which is already conveyed three times by me, once strongly by my dearest Krshna Das that, as in Tattva, Lord SadaShiva is Lord Vishnu. But, you will not grasp such subtle tattva because your love for Lord Shiva is that strong.

Hare Krshna.

[grames]

Dear Yogesh,

Gaudiyas think all end is at the feet of Lord Krshna. It may not be very interesting for someone who just want to wander all over the place as in Tourists. For such people, it is not very pleasing or not easy to understand why in the world these crazy creatures are so sentimental, emotional and so personal about worshiping just one deity. For Gaudiyas, Krshna is ultimate, Krshna provides all variety, Krshna runs the show forever with out any tinge of tiredness or boredom. Its all Krshna leela, but only for those who turn their will, wish towards Him.

Wish you very happy and graceful Krshna Janmastami!
Hare Krshna!

[atanu]

Dear Atanu and Jogesh,
Dear Atanu, it is not the first time you are throwing this pin thinking what is presented here as mere inflated balloon.

????????
O Lord Girîsha, since You are Brahman which is transcendental to the material modes of goodness, passion and ignorance, the various directors of this material world certainly cannot appreciate it or even know where it is. It is not understandable even to Lord Brahmâ, Lord Vishnu or the King of heaven, Mahendra ( SB 8:7:31)

Frankly speaking, in your post I cannot see any explanation of the above and questions that i requested you to consider. So, I am refering the earlier post again for your perusal, so that you may see the questions and the implications again..

http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/sho...8&postcount=61

My interest is not the Supremacy angle at all (which is futile since neither you nor me have seen anything of the Supreme). My interest is to stimulate enquiry regarding the adjectives and phrases used for Shivam - such as inconceivable, Self Effulgent, one whom BrahmA, Vishnu, and Mahendra fail to understand, creator of universe, secret and patiM patiinaaM paramaM parastaad (Controller of Controllers and Supreme beyond the Supreme).

If you wish, we may request satay to shift this part of the discussion on to a new thread so as not to pollute the present thread, which is on Gaudiya Understanding.

Om Namah Shivaya

[grames]

Yes. I wish this thread was not polluted at all. In fact, this thread was created as on offshot of another thread fearing pollution