Oddities of Various Purana-s

[Aupmanyav]

And what does the supremacy of Bhagawat Purana over Vedas show? Worship Krishna only? As already pointed out by you, Jas, SrimadBhagawat contains Rudra Gita which eulogizes Rudra/Shiva. So, if we come back to the question 'who is greater?', we get the answer that they are one and the same. Hare-Krishnas themselves at various places have accepted this. Then, why all this 'Kolavery D'? Hare-Krishnas will never achieve what they want to achieve by insisting on their own 'Ishta' as they have done in this write-up. However, they should begin first with correcting the spelling of the name of their ashram. It is never 'Narasingha' but 'NaraSimha'.

 

[Jaskaran Singh]

And what does the supremacy of Bhagawat Purana over Vedas show? Worship Krishna only? As already pointed out by you, Jas, SrimadBhagawat contains Rudra Gita which eulogizes Rudra/Shiva. So, if we come back to the question 'who is greater?', we get the answer that they are one and the same. Hare-Krishnas themselves at various places have accepted this. Then, why all this 'Kolavery D'? Hare-Krishnas will never achieve what they want to achieve by insisting on their own 'Ishta' as they have done in this write-up. However, they should begin first with correcting the spelling of the name of their ashram. It is never 'Narasingha' but 'NaraSimha'.

I'm not an ISKCONite (I'm the one arguing against the ISKCONite translations, remember?), perhaps you should ask them these questions...

 

[Nyingjé Tso]

This is not a debate
We are not at war
Shiva vs Visnu is old useless overdebated stuff that doesn't need to be on the table again.
It is, anyway, not the purpose of this tread.
We are Hindus.
We are not at war with each other.
We love each other
Ishta Devta is personal God. Yes. PERSONAL. Get it ? PERSONAL. GOD.
Calm down
Relax
It's a cute animal.
Look at this cute animal.
You feel calm ?
No ?
Look at him again.
You feel better ?
Nice.
Let's then resume the conversation leaving our mutual sects/Ishtas/Sampradaya aside now.



Aum Namah Shivaya

 

[Aupmanyav]

I'm not an ISKCONite (I'm the one arguing against the ISKCONite translations, remember?), perhaps you should ask them these questions...

I understand that clearly. Thanks for your stance. I am arguing against 'Krishna' extremists, present and future. Hinduism does not allow that. Of course, Krishna is Brahman, but so is Shiva too, as also Shakti. Brahman, by definition, includes everyone and everything. 'Ekam Sat, dwiteeyo nasti'.

 

[Tyaga]

I understand that clearly. Thanks for your stance. I am arguing against 'Krishna' extremists, present and future. Hinduism does not allow that. Of course, Krishna is Brahman, but so is Shiva too, as also Shakti. Brahman, by definition, includes everyone and everything. 'Ekam Sat, dwiteeyo nasti'.

Exactly.But it is quite natural that people place their Ishta-Devata over other Devatas.

Sometimes,i think it is a good thing that i don't follow any specific sampradaya....even though i'm from the janmabhūmi of Sri Adi Shankara.

 

[Aupmanyav]

How far from Kaladi, Tyāga? My friend, Dr. Ramaswami Ayyangar, was incharge of the Chinmaya Mission in Veliyanad at Edakkattuvayal Village (Adi Sankara's mother's village) for some time.

 

[ratikala]

prehaps we can all agree on one thing , .Cow Protection

 

[Jaskaran Singh]

I understand that clearly. Thanks for your stance. I am arguing against 'Krishna' extremists, present and future. Hinduism does not allow that. Of course, Krishna is Brahman, but so is Shiva too, as also Shakti. Brahman, by definition, includes everyone and everything. 'Ekam Sat, dwiteeyo nasti'.

To be honest, I too would not view every single deity at the same level as viShNu (perhaps some, but not all), because that in itself goes against the shAstra-s. For example, indra as punished for brAhmaNahatya after killing the dasyu vR^itra (who was a brAhmaNa), whereas rAma was not punished for murdering rAvaNa, who was a brAhmaNa/brahmarAkShasa. Clearly, the former (indra) is succeptible to karma just like a jIva, whereas the latter (viShNu) is not. Regardless of that, I do agree that ISKCONites can be intolerant at times; I recently recall being told (by an ISCONite) that my belief in dvaitAdvaita is only a vAda/theory, whereas their belief (i.e. achintyabhedAbheda tattva) is a siddhAnta/proper conclusion. Ugh....
Edit: Also, it's ekobrahma dvitIyanAsti, not 'Ekam Sat, dwiteeyo nasti.'

 

[NobodyYouKnow]

To be honest, I too would not view every single deity at the same level as viShNu (perhaps some, but not all), because that in itself goes against the shAstra-s. For example, indra as punished for brAhmaNahatya after killing the dasyu vR^itra (who was a brAhmaNa), whereas rAma was not punished for murdering rAvaNa, who was a brAhmaNa/brahmarAkShasa. Clearly, the former (indra) is succeptible to karma just like a jIva, whereas the latter (viShNu) is not.

Oh...Oh...I can contribute to this...

Even Lord Shiva was punished for beheading Lord Brahma, a Brahmana and as such, was forced to carry his head around always as a reminder..

Last night, I was trying to work out if Lord Shiva is susceptible to karma...being that He cannot fix my state of poverty or my depression no matter how much I love and pray to Him, making me believe He doesn't even care/exist.

Then, last night, I realised there is one who is beyond karma, being that Shiva is beyond everything and cannot interfere because His hands are tied....by Maya...by His Shakti.

He said that He didn't 'do it' and therefore cannot 'undo it' and to basically; 'speak to da missus about it' and that He would also petition Her, but He cannot do it directly...

So, if karma is in/part of this 'illusory sphere', that means Devi controls/regulates it...especially this Devi:

So, at least I am 'getting there', even though I am not fully over this - not by a long shot...so, more cute animals:

Om Hreem Aagachchha Aagachchha Kameshwari Swaha
Om Namah Shivaya

 

[Aupmanyav]

To be honest, I too would not view every single deity at the same level as viShNu (perhaps some, but not all), because that in itself goes against the shAstra-s. For example, indra as punished for brAhmaNahatya after killing the dasyu vR^itra (who was a brAhmaNa), whereas rAma was not punished for murdering rAvaNa, who was a brAhmaNa/brahmarAkShasa. Clearly, the former (indra) is succeptible to karma just like a jIva, whereas the latter (viShNu) is not. Regardless of that, I do agree that ISKCONites can be intolerant at times; I recently recall being told (by an ISCONite) that my belief in dvaitAdvaita is only a vAda/theory, whereas their belief (i.e. achintyabhedAbheda tattva) is a siddhAnta/proper conclusion. Ugh....
Edit: Also, it's ekobrahma dvitIyanAsti, not 'Ekam Sat, dwiteeyo nasti.'

Thanks, Jas. Every one is a brahmin, because we owe our existence to Lord Brahma. IMHO, Indra was punished for decieving Ahilya. And Lord Rama observed penance at Tunganath (12,000 ft.) situated above Chopta Bugyal (Alpine medow) for killing Ravana.

Chopta - in August, the place where Lord Rama meditated, Tunganath temple, the highest of the Pancha-Kedars, Shiva temples in Uttar Khand)

 

[satyaroop]

looks very peaceful...
and the view looks amazing, see video

[youtube]nfYAA__iUzc[/youtube]
Tungnath Temple - YouTube

 

[Jaskaran Singh]

Thanks, Jas. Every one is a brahmin, because we owe our existence to Lord Brahma.

Okay, but considering you don't believe in brahmA, then I assume that in your opinion, no one is a brAhmaNa.

IMHO, Indra was punished for decieving Ahilya.

Yes, indra seduced ahalyA and was indeed cursed by R^iShi gautama, but that was according to the rAmAyaNam. Not everyone here accepts smR^iti texts, or else I would have also mentioned how indra was unable to drink the halAhala (which shiva took) as per the shiva purANam, or how indra was humbled by kR^iShNa during the lifting of govardhana giri/govardhanAchala in the bhAgavatam. The information about indra bearing the burden for brAhmaNahatya after kiling vR^itra/vishvarUpaH (the son of tvaShTR^i) and hence being susceptible to karma and needing to be purged of this sin by drinking soma, thereby causing fierce beasts to emerge from his body, comes from shruti (more specifically, the shatapatha brAhmaNa):
sa ya\'nnasto'dravat|
ta\'taH siMhaH sa\'mabhavada\'tha yatka\'rNAbhyAma\'dravatta\'to kR^I\'kaH sa\'mabhavada\'tha yada\'vAchaH prANAdadra\'vatta\'taH shArdUla\'jyeShThAH shvA\'padAH sa\'mabhavanna\'tha yadu\'ttarAtprANAda\'dravatsA\' parisruda\'tha trirníraShThIvatta\'taH ku\'valaM karka\'ndhu ba\'darami\'ti sa\'mabhavatsa sa\'rveNaiva vyA\_rdhyata sa\'rvaM hi so\'maH||10||
sa so\'mAtipUto ma~Nku\'riva chachAra|
ta\'meta\'yAshvínAvabhiShajyatAM taM sa\'rveNaiva sa\'mArdhayatAM sa\'rvaM hi so\'maH sa va\'sIyAneve\_ShTvA\_bhavat||11||

And Lord Rama observed penance at Tunganath (12,000 ft.) situated above Chopta Bugyal (Alpine medow) for killing Ravana.

Chopta - in August, the place where Lord Rama meditated, Tunganath temple, the highest of the Pancha-Kedars, Shiva temples in Uttar Khand)]

Seriously? You know my stance on "folk-tradition" pramANa; I don't believe in it.... I can accept the stories of rAma worshipping viShNu at rAmeshvaram and the story of viShNu not being able to find the source of the pillar of light as being part of the lIlA between viShNu and shiva, but I am not going to accept that shrI viShNu, who is infinitely transcendental to karma, needs to perform some form of tapasya or prAyashchitta after killing rAvaNa (who was actually blessed, because anyone who dies at the hands of shrI hari is granted mokSha), just because some people choose to believe so or to make a mandir there. If I'm supposed to take this seriously, then why shouldn't I also take the sonia gAndhi (cough...antonia maino...cough) or sachin tendulkar mandir-s seriously, or if I'm supposed to consider this to be pramANa, then why not also consider comments by Christians and Muslims cursing bhagavAn to be forms of "pramANa," lol.
Edit: Also, I think it's chandrashilA where he supposedly did tapasya (which is near tunganAth but not at the exact same place), because on the sundara dR^iShya section of this website, it says "yaha vahi jaga hai jahAN bhagavAn rAm ne rAkShaso'N kA rAjA rAvaN ko jItne ke bAd tap kiyA" (I don't believe that, but whatevs).

 

[Aupmanyav]

looks very peaceful..

Yes, Tunganath is very beautiful. When I went there some 20 years ago, there were just two shops in front of the temple. Stayed there for a night. The slopes had golden grass (it was june, so the grass was dry). Wanted to add two more pictures, but the internet stopped me. So, the medow in August, and Chandrashila, the precipice, the highest point where Lord Rama did his penance. There is a huge drop on the other side of the temple, a few thousand feet, I think. The golden grass.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Okay, but considering you don't believe in brahmA, then I assume that in your opinion, no one is a brAhmaNa.

So, what if I do not believe it. Most Hindus do.

The information about indra bearing the burden for brAhmaNahatya after kiling vR^itra/vishvarUpaH (the son of tvaShTR^i) and hence being susceptible to karma and needing to be purged of this sin by drinking soma, thereby causing fierce beasts to emerge from his body, comes from shruti (more specifically, the shatapatha brAhmaNa):

Today's Smriti is tomorrow's Shruti.

Seriously? You know my stance on "folk-tradition" pramANa; I don't believe in it....

Then, don't. People believe and not believe in various things. But the folks there mostly believe it. They take up pilgrimages. Give trade to shop-keepers and transporters. They congregate at various places every 12 years each, so that every year there would be a few 'yatras' (pilgrimages), participate in local hats/bazaars, exchange goods, arrange marriages, sustain the priests and their families, repair the temple to some extent. This is their way of life and their economy.

Lord Rama was in the form of a human. So what is applicable to humans would also be applicable to him. That is why he felt so much sorrow for Mother Sita's abduction. Killing Ravana, a brahmin, would certainly require atonement.

 

[Ravi500]

My aunt was a red-head and this cropped up when the marriage was being discussed. But Kashmiris do have this hair-color.

The kashmiris homogenously fair complexion is quite different in complexion from the rest of India which is predominantly of tawny skin or dark skin. This is mainly due to the fact that they are of jewish origin, descendants of the jewish tribes who settled in kashmir in ancient past. They are also a relatively small population as well compared to people of other states.

The travelling Arab historian El Bironi who lived in the 12th century wrote thus,"In the past, permission to enter Kashmir was given only to Jews"

Many kashmiris have learnt from genetic testing , to their great surprise, that their genes are closely related to those of Jewish groups.

Interpolation, because if Manu was from Aryan stock, red-hair would not be uncommon (Tusharas - Tocharians). I think, it is about keeping blood-lines pure.

Arya means a noble person, or a person of excellent culture and character. It does not have any racial connotation. Anyone can be an Arya provided he is of noble character and conduct, even if he is of ignoble descent. The example of Rishi Satyakama Jabala, the illegitimate son of a prostitute, is a glorious example.

The present hindu people are a multi-racial people, mixed with almost all the races of the world, including that of jewish blood.

And this is in tune with the teaching of the Rig Veda i.e Vasudeiva Kudumbakam, -- The whole world is one family.

 

[Poeticus]

And this is in tune with the teaching of the Rig Veda i.e Vasudeiva Kudumbakam, -- The whole world is one family.

Can you please be kind as to provide me with a Rg-Vedic verse citation (preferably that of Mandala #, Sukta #, Verse #) wherein the phrase, "vasudhaiva kutumbakam", is found?

 

[Ravi500]

Can you please be kind as to provide me with a Rg-Vedic verse citation (preferably that of Mandala #, Sukta #, Verse #) wherein the phrase, "vasudhaiva kutumbakam", is found?

Apologize, it is not from the Rig Veda, but from the Maha Upanishad .

 

[Poeticus]

Apologize, it is not from the Rig Veda, but from the Maha Upanishad .

Can you please give me the verse citation from the Maha Upanishad?

 

[Ravi500]

Can you please give me the verse citation from the Maha Upanishad?

I am sure you can find it from the Maha Upanishad yourself.

 

[Aupmanyav]

This is mainly due to the fact that they are of jewish origin, descendants of the jewish tribes who settled in kashmir in ancient past.

The travelling Arab historian El Bironi who lived in the 12th century wrote thus, "In the past, permission to enter Kashmir was given only to Jews"

Many kashmiris have learnt from genetic testing , to their great surprise, that their genes are closely related to those of Jewish groups.

We are Saraswatas and have been in India probably even before Abrahamic Adam. My progenitor has a verse in RigVeda and seventh mandala of RigVeda is ascribed to us, the Vasishthas. Kashmris are not the only fair colored people in India, there are Punjabis, Himachalis, Uttarkhandis, and Haryanavis. Do you mean to say that all fair colored people in India are descendants of Jews? That would require more evidence than just your assertion.

Kindly lead us to your sources for the jewish ancestory of Kashmiri brahmins or do you think an unsupported quote from El-bironi (normally it is spelled as al-Biruni) and a mention of genetics will be sufficient to establish this?