Only my god is superior!

[ratikala]

That is a wonderful reply, Ratikala ji.

Seems to address my concern here to the point.

Thank you very much. :namaste

jai jai :namaste . please accept my serva sister ji

 

[Viraja]

I absolutely understand now.

 

[Poeticus]

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.

I don't know if you were talking about me or not, but I wasn't "ranting" when I talked about the Shri 33 Gods being equal and what not.

...

This whole supremacy and inferiority stuff is completely new to the Shruti Shakha-s.

Thank the Gods the Shruti Sects didn't get hit with the Abrahamic humbug, .

My God is superior to your God; no my God is superior to your God; no: mine is! No: mine is!

 

[Vinayaka]

I don't know if you were talking about me or not, but I wasn't "ranting" when I talked about the Shri 33 Gods being equal and what not.

Not talking to anybody in particular. Nobody listens anyway.

 

[Poeticus]

Not talking to anybody in particular. Nobody listens anyway.

I'll listen to you. Tell me a story.

 

[Ashoka]

Not talking to anybody in particular. Nobody listens anyway.

I listen! :yes:

 

[Kalidas]

I think everyone's view is superior...for them, and I have no right to say they are right or wrong or I am right or wrong. I think arguing about whose God(s) is better is a fruitless indever. This does not mean that one can not feel the way they choose to worship is "superior", because if you didn't feel that it was why would you continue doing it?

Now to think it is better simply because "I am the one doing it" is egotistic. But to think it is "better" because it calls to you and helps you become a better devotee/person, then I would not say you are wrong.

Be proud of who you are and what you are, but don't be a jerk about it.

 

[Kalicharan Tuvij]

I endorse what MV ji has said, not because it is also my personal view but because this is what Veda has clearly spelt out: "All of You, O ye thirty three Gods, yes all of you are EQUAL, none among you is lesser to anyone."

Now someone can ask a phony question here: who are these 33 gods?
Well, the answer to this will vary between MV ji and me, but anyways, Vishnu, Shiva, Shakti all are included in it. And of course "the" Brahman too.

The real issue is not equality or inequality of Gods. It is, "hierarchy".
So a Shaiva who believes that Shiva is "higher" than Murugan, or a Vaishnav who thinks that "Devi" is an "attendant" on Sri Vishnu, is no different than a Shaiva who says Shiva is "higher" than Vishnu, or a Vaishnava who says Vishnu is "higher" than Shiva.

Therefore, the question before a Shaiva, for example, is:
How come Shiva be the superior among His own family?

When the Family goes on a walk to the melā (carnival), or to visit the worlds, etc, someone sees them, and exclaims: "See, the GaNesh-family is going!". Yet someone says: "Mother goes with Her family."

Playful Gandharva children see them, and cry out loud: "Murugan! And his family!"

A true Himdu's fight is, therefore, against hierarchy. Be it of Gods, or of people. See, for example, the VarNa where Shudras are wrongly made out to be the lesser ones, and even the "dvija" (second born status) is denied to them by the others.

Or, take the example of the plight of women in India. What is the religion of the people who have decided to "show" them their true "place"? Do they go to temples?
Hierarchy it is, stupid :slap:

p.s.: it is good to see people revolt against the growing materialism and embrace one or the other god in Dharma as their ISta. This is already a big step ahead, and I pray that they sooner than later come to realise the true diversity of Devas-Devis.

 

[Viraja]

My only question is that, given each person views his deity to be supreme, what is the necessity to view him/her (the deity) as the 'only supreme' and avoiding going to the temples of other devatas scantily or taking of their prasad..

That is why I had given pancha samskara as an example. With procedures such as this, one might not visit other deities' temple and take their prasad... even occassionally.

Whether this extreme of devotion - of never to bow to another deity or take their prasad whatever the circumstance is, is necessary...? If so, what is the reason or benefit?

 

[Poeticus]

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.

I endorse what MV ji has said, not because it is also my personal view but because this is what Veda has clearly spelt out: "All of You, O ye thirty three Gods, yes all of you are EQUAL, none among you is lesser to anyone."

(R.V.8-30.1):
Not one of you, ye Shri Gods, is small, none of you is a feeble child:
All of you, verily, are great [you are all of mature existence]." (All of mature existence: sato mahAntah = sarvasmAd vidyamAnAt prthivyAm api ye mahAntas tesatomahAnta iti ucyante; literally meaning: greather than all that is)

 

[Kalicharan Tuvij]

This isn't my personal battle. Frankly, today I have no stakes. May be I will leave here this as a question for everybody to reflect upon.

In a classroom some excel at sports, some at community works, some in academics, yet some in arts. Who is to decide? The clerk sitting in the office? Or the peon who rings the bell?

Or shall someone, better still, decide a hierarchy: academics > arts > sports > blah blah..

p.s.: thanks anyway for pointing the verse out MV ji. Though I don't think it will drive sense into...

 

[KrsnaDasa]

My only question is that, given each person views his deity to be supreme, what is the necessity to view him/her (the deity) as the 'only supreme' and avoiding going to the temples of other devatas scantily or taking of their prasad..

That is why I had given pancha samskara as an example. With procedures such as this, one might not visit other deities' temple and take their prasad... even occassionally.

Whether this extreme of devotion - of never to bow to another deity or take their prasad whatever the circumstance is, is necessary...? If so, what is the reason or benefit?

Most traditions who view their God as supreme over others are more dualist in perspective, or see that personality as a reality rather just a projection of our ego upon it. For instance, Shaiva Siddhantas, see Lord Śiva in three ways. As the absolute Para Śiva, the Paramatma or as they call the Primal Soul, and Satchitananda. So because they believe in an actual Iśvara (rather then just an egoic projection), who they view as that (Śiva), He is seen supreme.

Only syncretists and Advaitins (especially "Neo-Advaitins) seem to enjoy viewing all Gods as one. But Vaishnavism, Shaivism, and Shaktism tend to see it differently. Alot of it has to do with previous Gurus and Sampradaya views too and scriptures.

 

[Poeticus]

p.s.: thanks anyway for pointing the verse out MV ji. Though I don't think it will drive sense into...

No problem, brother. It won't sink into the heads of the very Hindu Sects that were solely created to rise above Buddhism and Christian and Muslim influence. Don't forget: "what harm can they of different prayers do to us who enjoy the protection of Mitra-Varuna?" (R.V.1.122.13)

I don't see anything in the above attesting to the equivalence of devas with brahman.

Yes, it doesn't attest equivalence. It actually attests superiority to BrahmAn. Greater than "all that is". "All that is" = Brahman.

 

[Viraja]

Totally shunning other deities reminds me of my experience with my Sikhi friend. She refused to take my Lakshmi Narasimha picture after she delivered her stillborn baby and was crying like hell. Sometimes, to give company to others, to enjoy the festivity, or out of respect for the devotee and the deity, we may like to go to temples of other deities.

My only question is, I REPEAT, what is the benefit or requirement that one shun other deities? Does the deity require it?

 

[Poeticus]

Totally shunning other deities reminds me of my experience with my Sikhi friend. She refused to take my Lakshmi Narasimha picture after she delivered her stillborn baby and was crying like hell. Sometimes, to give company to others, to enjoy the festivity, or out of respect for the devotee and the deity, we may like to go to temples of other deities.

Sikhs aren't Hindus. They don't believe in Narsimha. In fact, according to Gurbani, they can't. Ask Satnaam-ji or Gursikh or even Chinubhai for clarification in SikhDIR.

My only question is, I REPEAT, what is the benefit or requirement that one shun other deities? Does the deity require it?

No. The Holy Ones of Shruti are not jealous like those of Abrahamism. But, I don't know about Ones of Smriti.

 

[Kalicharan Tuvij]

No problem, brother. It won't sink into the heads of the very Hindu Sects that were solely created to rise above Buddhism and Christian and Muslim influence.

Sad, but true.

Yes, it doesn't attest equivalence. It actually attests superiority to BrahmAn. Greater than "all that is". "All that is" = Brahman.

HeHeHe. Brahman has become today to Hinduism what SoniaG is to Indian politics.

Let dudes outwit each other here. I am leaving the thread for good.
auf wiedersehen

 

[Kalidas]

My only question is that, given each person views his deity to be supreme, what is the necessity to view him/her (the deity) as the 'only supreme' and avoiding going to the temples of other devatas scantily or taking of their prasad..

That is why I had given pancha samskara as an example. With procedures such as this, one might not visit other deities' temple and take their prasad... even occassionally.

Whether this extreme of devotion - of never to bow to another deity or take their prasad whatever the circumstance is, is necessary...? If so, what is the reason or benefit?

Well as I said before superior for "them". do I think any of the Gods are TRULY superior over any other? No. Yet do I think some are Superior to what I think, believe, and helps me in my spiritual development? yes. This does not mean that others are wrong. MV is a strict polytheist and I love him for it and would never dream of calling him wrong, he keeps it old school. Kalicharan and I love Kali maa very much and she means a lot to us. So I guess what I am saying is I feel both sides of this argument are incorrect. I don't know, I still think people should stick with what is "right for them" just don't be mean about it.

 

[Viraja]

So I guess what I am saying is I feel both sides of this argument are incorrect. I don't know, I still think people should stick with what is "right for them" just don't be mean about it.

lol.. I exactly feel the same way, if someone who practices monotheism says to me, viewing one god is supreme is only correct, it sounds wrong to me, and if a polytheist says 'no, Hindus should worship all gods equally' that also sounds wrong to me.. I'm totally confused.. It is just that I was contemplating on getting pancha samskara done on me sometime.. and was thinking about the relative merits and lack thereof of the procedure.. I guess it all comes down to having the benefit of a qualified acharya to clarify some sensitive questions...

 

[Poeticus]

and if a polytheist says 'no, Hindus should worship all gods equally' that also sounds wrong to me..

We don't say that. The Shruti scripture says that all the 33 Shri Gods are equal (in a certain way, of course).

I doubt Shruti scripture can be wrong. But, you are free to disagree with the foundational scriptures of Hinduism. In the Kali Yuga, it is to be expected. We should also take a few hymns from the Shri Rig Veda and the Shri Sama Veda and destroy them, eradicate them, and burn them. It only makes sense, since they would be incorrect. Are you with me? We should definitely destroy many portions of these Shruti scriptures. Who else is with me?

 

[Viraja]

We don't say that. The Shruti scripture says that all the 33 Shri Gods are equal (in a certain way, of course).

I doubt Shruti scripture can be wrong. But, you are free to disagree with the foundational scriptures of Hinduism. In the Kali Yuga, it is to be expected. We should also take a few hymns from the Shri Rig Veda and the Shri Sama Veda and destroy them, eradicate them, and burn them. It only makes sense, since they would be incorrect. Are you with me? We should definitely destroy many portions of these Shruti scriptures. Who else is with me?

No, I'm not with you. I don't want to burn the scriptures, but I don't want to go against my current understanding of the lifetime message from acharyas such as Srimad Ramanujacharya either. That is why, I feel there is a need for a good teacher/perceptor... As much as can be applied by my present emotional and intellectual status, it seems reasonable to worship one primary deity, as Ratikala ji pointed out, we need to get deeper into devotion and concentrating on one deity allows that. But I need to know/am curious to know the benefit of procedures such as pancha samskara or VeeraShaivism, Lingayat, etc.