Only my god is superior!

[Viraja]

Some of us tend to think that the god we pray to is only superior, in the sense, has greater yogic power, has greater 'shakti' or prowess, is more benevolent, and thus the only one worthy of praise. (The individual schools of thought also encourage this attitude to some extent).

Here is a paragraph I read recently from a famous Jyotishi cum. Philosopher's work, which made sense to me:

An unawkened sadhaka practicing bhakti yoga is devoted to god and worships him/her as much as one can, but will project his ego, conditioning and desires onto his worship and hence onto the god he worships. For example, he may think "I worship the highest god while that person worships a lower god. I am better" or "I am worshipping god everyday. I will get so and so result" or "I worship god more than that person. I am better". An awkened sadhaka practicing bhakti yoga has little expectation, pride etc. Worship becomes not about him but about god! He worships god and marvels at the power that holds this cosmos together - the power that runs things infinitismally smaller than a boson and infinitely larger than a galaxy. He will look at himself as a fully insignificant particle in front a supreme power. His desires, likes, dislikes, conditioning and agendas start to seem too insignificant in front of contemplating about that supreme power. Even as that devotional spirit increases, there will be episodes when one becomes self-centered in one's worship. But with practice, one loses oneself completely and surrenders completely to the supreme power and become liberated in the end.

From: Yahoo! Groups

 

[Poeticus]

I noticed that the quoted text speaks on behalf of the Bhakti Yoga Dharma sect of Hinduism. I now have an understanding of how Bhakti Yogis view veneration and Bhaktic practice in the yogic sense.

 

[Viraja]

मैत्रावरुणिः ji,

I would love to hear from you little bit about bhakti yoga, on what it speaks about veneration (of deities as I understand).

Thanks.

 

[Ashoka]

 

[Poeticus]

मैत्रावरुणिः ji,

I would love to hear from you little bit about bhakti yoga, on what it speaks about veneration (of deities as I understand).

Thanks.

Namaste, Viraja:

I wouldn't be able to answer because I don't practice Bhakti Yoga nor am I of that sect. That's why I said that I appreciated finally being able to understand approach to veneration from a Bhakti Yogi's perspective.

PS - Shivoham, how is that beautiful picture (post #4) relevant?

EDIT: Never mind, Shivoham - I noticed the fusion - I get your point.

 

[Viraja]

Thank you for the beautiful picture, Shivoham.

 

[Ashoka]

PS - Shivoham, how is that beautiful picture (post #4) relevant?

EDIT: Never mind, Shivoham - I noticed the fusion - I get your point.

I was being cheeky But yeah, my point was, Vishnu, Shiva, two sides of the same coin. And Shakti is Shiva's dynamic aspect, so Shakti is also the same. So, in my book, whether you are Vaishnava, Shaiva or Shakta; you worship God :3

 

[Viraja]

Namaste, Viraja:

I wouldn't be able to answer because I don't practice Bhakti Yoga nor am I of that sect. That's why I said that I appreciated finally being able to understand approach to veneration from a Bhakti Yogi's perspective.

PS - Shivoham, how is that beautiful picture (post #4) relevant?

Oh, sorry! I misunderstood Nevermind!

But what do you think about individual schools of thought (Shaiva, Vaishnava, ISKCON, Shakta etc) having a general view that deity spoken in their scripture is the most superior? If we see closely, these sects do not even recognize presence of other deities as such.. Don't you think at best this stimulates competitiveness?

 

[Poeticus]

So, in my book, whether you are Vaishnava, Shaiva or Shakta; you worship God :3

That's a good way to leave me out. I am neither; I worship Gods. Plural. With an "s". Muahahaha!

But, I have always wanted a succinct explanation of Bhaktic Yoga and its perspective and now I have received one. It was a good quote. Thanks Viraja.

 

[Ashoka]

That's a good way to leave me out. I am neither; I worship Gods. Plural. With an "s". Muahahaha!

But, I have always wanted a succinct explanation of Bhaktic Yoga and its perspective and now I have received one. It was a good quote. Thanks Viraja.

D'awwww I didn't mean to

 

[Poeticus]

But what do you think about individual schools of thought (Shaiva, Vaishnava, ISKCON, Shakta etc) having a general view that deity spoken in their scripture is the most superior? If we see closely, these sects do not even recognize presence of other deities as such.. Don't you think at best this stimulates competitiveness?

Well, since you asked:

...These sects remind me of rising developments in order to counter the growing influence of two things: first, Buddhism; then, Islam and Christianity.

You didn't have such competitions during the early Vedic Age of Ancient India, even though Lord Shri Indra is repeatedly, consistently, and persistently labeled in the Shri Rig Veda as "manasvān devo" and "prathamo" which would mean "supreme above all" and "Chief (Supreme) God". Why didn't you have such competition? Because the Vedic Rishis were way too enlightened to traverse upon superior-inferior materialism. Each of the 33 Gods mentioned in Shrutic revelation was held in equal respect even though a few of them were mantra-cized as "superior". It was ordered, structured, and profoundly revealing of the inner workings of cosmic, divine powers that were the distributors of Rta and Satya - which were spiritual powers and universal laws (the fusion of these two gives us the modern notion of "brahmāN").

 

[Viraja]

Recently I had good conversation with a wonderful Vaishnava. He had proclaimed Narayana as the superior and that he would not worship any other deity, other than those endorsed in the SriVaishnava sect.

While I respect his view, I find it hard to put into practice. I am, for one, drawn to multiple deities of multiple sects, and though I do not worship them everyday, will not hesitate to listen to devotional music on them or visit their temple if there is a chance.

I am confused which view is actually correct, view #1 or mine? (I instinctively feel other members would say it is upto each individual, but you can say I am more interested in hearing from those who subscribe to view #1).

 

[Viraja]

Well, since you asked:

...These sects remind me of rising developments in order to counter the growing influence of two things: first, Buddhism; then, Islam and Christianity.

You didn't have such competitions during the early Vedic Age of Ancient India, even though Lord Shri Indra is repeatedly, consistently, and persistently labeled in the Shri Rig Veda as "manasvān devo" and "prathamo" which would mean "supreme above all" and "Chief (Supreme) God". Why didn't you have such competition? Because the Vedic Rishis were way too enlightened to traverse upon superior-inferior materialism. Each of the 33 Gods mentioned in Shrutic revelation was held in equal respect even though a few of them were mantra-cized as "superior". It was ordered, structured, and profoundly revealing of the inner workings of cosmic, divine powers that were the distributors of Rta and Satya - which were spiritual powers and universal laws (the fusion of these two gives us the modern notion of "brahmāN").

I didn't know Rig Veda viewed all 33 deities as equals. I'm just curious - who are these 33 deities? (Did you mean to say, 33 crore deities?). It is very good to have a scripture that speaks highly about all our deities, in equal merits.

 

[Jainarayan]

:yes: Śivasya hridayam Vishnur Vishnoscha hridayam Śivah - (Vishnu is the heart of Shiva and Shiva is the heart of Vishnu).

 

[Viraja]

There is a SriVaishnava procedure called 'Pancha Samskara' - also known as 'initiation' or 'surrender' unto Sriman Narayana.

I wonder why such a procedure is essential. Those who undergo this procedure may not go to other temples, other than that of Sriman Narayana.

I believe each sect will have similar procedures. I wonder why Hinduism seems to have this type of segregation in the first place -- what is the benefit of viewing one's god as the 'supreme'? (I'm just eager as a learner, not arguing against Pancha Samskara).

[youtube]n7jG3GJ8NK0[/youtube]
Srivaishnava Initiation - Pancha Samskara - YouTube

 

[Vinayaka]

If somebody wants to thing their God is superior, let them. It's a big world. We can make the choice to hang out and listen, or let it go in one ear and out the other. Nor is it all that beneficial to go ranting on about how all the Gods, (or at least the Supreme Gods of each sect) are all equal. Better just to go worship your God. Humble worship brings more humility, so it's an upward spiral, if you will.

 

[Viraja]

Thank you, Vinayaka ji.

I also posted my question in the other group (HDF) and hopefully my good Vaishnava friend can provide me with some insight!

 

[ratikala]

namaskaram viraja ji :namaste

Some of us tend to think that the god we pray to is only superior, in the sense, has greater yogic power, has greater 'shakti' or prowess, is more benevolent, and thus the only one worthy of praise. (The individual schools of thought also encourage this attitude to some extent).

Here is a paragraph I read recently from a famous Jyotishi cum. Philosopher's work, which made sense to me:

Quote:
An unawkened sadhaka practicing bhakti yoga is devoted to god and worships him/her as much as one can, but will project his ego, conditioning and desires onto his worship and hence onto the god he worships. For example, he may think "I worship the highest god while that person worships a lower god. I am better" or "I am worshipping god everyday. I will get so and so result" or "I worship god more than that person. I am better". An awkened sadhaka practicing bhakti yoga has little expectation, pride etc. Worship becomes not about him but about god! He worships god and marvels at the power that holds this cosmos together - the power that runs things infinitismally smaller than a boson and infinitely larger than a galaxy. He will look at himself as a fully insignificant particle in front a supreme power. His desires, likes, dislikes, conditioning and agendas start to seem too insignificant in front of contemplating about that supreme power. Even as that devotional spirit increases, there will be episodes when one becomes self-centered in one's worship. But with practice, one loses oneself completely and surrenders completely to the supreme power and become liberated in the end.

''Some of us tend to think that the god we pray to is only superior, in the sense, has greater yogic power, has greater 'shakti' or prowess, is more benevolent, and thus the only one worthy of praise. (The individual schools of thought also encourage this attitude to some extent)''.

this thinking is ' rajasic '.... (in the mode of passion) . ultimately we need to rise above empasioned thought and behavior , and acheive a state of sattva (purity).

yes some schools do encorage this but this may be for two reasons ....firstly there is the rajasic temprement which displays great pride in it self , .... ''if I practice it then it is the best '' this is the ego being spoken of , ... the second has 'satvic' method and purpose , in that by directing the sadhaka to concentrate on one object of worship and one object of worship alone that that sadhaka will eventualy be brought to the stage of surrender :namaste



if the sadhaka is permitted to hop from divinity to divinity he will not deepen his understanding he will simply be engaging his emotions and indulging in the facination of experiencing the myriad qualitys of divinity , he will become like a bee going from flower to flower as soon as he moves from one flower to the next he has forgoten the the last , ..thus the term sadhana , ... to practice ...to asidiously practice , to absorb oneself untill self is lost , untill self is gone beyond , untill self is forgoten .

I know I repeat it often but ....

bhagavad gita ... ch 4 ...v 10 ...
Being freed from attatchment , fear and anger , being fully absorbed in Me , taking refuge in Me , many persons in the past became purified by knowledge of Me , ... and thus they atained trancendental love for Me .

it is only through surrender , ...by absorbing oneself fully in devotion to one form , becoming attatched to that one divinity that one looses ones attatchment to the self , and only when we have risen above the self that goes to his divinity with some expectation of a result , that we finaly go to that divinity out of love and adoration . having no self and no expectation , the sadhak is an empty vessel he is clensed of all ignorance that prevents knowledge . devoid of self interest he can know the lord and by knowing the lord he will be filled with love and wonder , .... at this point surrender is complete as never does the sadhaka wish to be sepperated from his lord this is bhakti , never wishing to be sepperated from ones lord :bow: never wanting anything to come between one self and ones lord .

to me it dosent mater if you do this as a vaisnava , through worshiping sri rama , sri krsna , sri narayana , whether one worships mahadeva or if one relyes solely upon the mesanger agni dev or the devoted servant sri hanuman ji , but to reach the otherside it is advisable to put ones faith in one ferry man not two

but once on the other side understanding is very very different one glorifies all ferry men :namaste

 

[Viraja]

... the second has 'satvic' method and purpose , in that by directing the sadhaka to concentrate on one object of worship and one object of worship alone that that sadhaka will eventualy be brought to the stage of surrender :namaste



if the sadhaka is permitted to hop from divinity to divinity he will not deepen his understanding he will simply be engaging his emotions and indulging in the facination of experiencing the myriad qualitys of divinity , he will become like a bee going from flower to flower as soon as he moves from one flower to the next he has forgoten the the last , ..thus the term sadhana , ... to practice ...to asidiously practice , to absorb oneself untill self is lost , untill self is gone beyond , untill self is forgoten .

I know I repeat it often but ....

bhagavad gita ... ch 4 ...v 10 ...
Being freed from attatchment , fear and anger , being fully absorbed in Me , taking refuge in Me , many persons in the past became purified by knowledge of Me , ... and thus they atained trancendental love for Me .

it is only through surrender , ...by absorbing oneself fully in devotion to one form , becoming attatched to that one divinity that one looses ones attatchment to the self , and only when we have risen above the self that goes to his divinity with some expectation of a result , that we finaly go to that divinity out of love and adoration .

to me it dosent mater if you do this as a vaisnava , through worshiping sri rama , sri krsna , sri narayana , whether one worships mahadeva or if one relyes solely upon the mesanger agni dev or the devoted servant sri hanuman ji , but to reach the otherside it is advisable to put ones faith in one ferry man not two

but once on the other side understanding is very very different one glorifies all ferry men :namaste

That is a wonderful reply, Ratikala ji.

Seems to address my concern here to the point.

Thank you very much. :namaste

 

[ratikala]

There is a SriVaishnava procedure called 'Pancha Samskara' - also known as 'initiation' or 'surrender' unto Sriman Narayana.

I wonder why such a procedure is essential. Those who undergo this procedure may not go to other temples, other than that of Sriman Narayana.

I believe each sect will have similar procedures. I wonder why Hinduism seems to have this type of segregation in the first place -- what is the benefit of viewing one's god as the 'supreme'? (I'm just eager as a learner, not arguing against Pancha Samskara).

[youtube]n7jG3GJ8NK0[/youtube]
Srivaishnava Initiation - Pancha Samskara - YouTube

namaskaram :namaste

''what is the benefit of viewing one's god as the 'supreme'? ''......

my divinity is not superme to your divinity , ......
one paeticular divinity is the supreme for that individual , that sadhaka must hold that divinity supreme . that is his sadhana .

so this idea of supremacy as some kind of rivalry is merly missunderstanding , it is ignorance it is 'rajaguna ' ,.... we need to develop 'sattvaguna' understanding :namaste