• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Than how can he be supreme God ?

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
Is there a special reason why Brahma unlike Shiva and Vishnu is not worshipped?

You do see Brahma shrines, but it is rare. There is no special reason, other than to say, historically, that's how it developed. There are conjectures about it.
 

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
In my experience, the Puranas tend to be 'all over the map' for lack of a better phrase. That's also probably why they're considered secondary scriptures by most of us. The idea the one God would curse another seems demeaning to the entire nature of God and gods. God seems far over that. This 'humanisation' or 'mortalisation' of God only happens in the Puranas.

Not to say they're not some good stories and valuable lessons.
 

Sumit

Sanatana Dharma
In my experience, the Puranas tend to be 'all over the map' for lack of a better phrase. That's also probably why they're considered secondary scriptures by most of us. The idea the one God would curse another seems demeaning to the entire nature of God and gods. God seems far over that. This 'humanisation' or 'mortalisation' of God only happens in the Puranas.

Not to say they're not some good stories and valuable lessons.
The puranas are self contradictory. The concept of three headed brahma itself comes from puranas.
 
That's Brahmh ofen referred as Brahman who is creator maintainer and destroyer of Universe. The Brahma is a vedic sage like other who mastered the vedas.

This is way off. Scripture says something so we have to quote it.

Whatever it says in the Vedas has to be quoted as it is stated in that source document.

Amar Chitra katha can say it better than most gurus need to.

Brahma's status is grandfather of all the Vedic sages and devas and planets.

Each time Brahma goes to sleep all is desolved.
When Brahma dies all is desolved.

Apparentlly some do not believe in the Puranas, so how can they quote it without reading them?
 
The puranas are self contradictory. The concept of three headed brahma itself comes from puranas.

Oh?

I have been reading the Puranas since I was a teen. I have never read Brahma has three heads. But I do see your statement as contradictory to the puranas.

The puranas are self contradictory.

The different puranas supplement each other. Contradictions are due to time and place of the story of each purana. Each story can be kalpas apart in time and setting. Each story can be yugas, manus, kalpas or even Brahma's life time apart in time and setting from each other.
 

Sumit

Sanatana Dharma
This is way off. Scripture says something so we have to quote it.

Whatever it says in the Vedas has to be quoted as it is stated in that source document.
Well Vedas clearly states that brahmh created Universe and it is formless--

O humans, the Brahm is almighty and free from the body. It is free from distortions and cannot be broken in pieces. It is free from veins. It is pure, sinless, omnipresent, omniscient, knows the nature of every creature, trample the sinners, source of pleasure. It has no parents and it never born or grows or dies. That Brahma which is beginning less gives the knowledge to its creation through Vedas. Adore it. (Yajurveda 40/8)
 
According to Puranas Brahma was cursed by shiva.

Shiva was born of Brahma. Brahma is Shiva's Son.

Both are here in the material world of earth, water, fire, air, either, mind, intelligence and ego.

We humans live short lives with little power and wealth.

The Shiva, Brahma and the devas live celestial lives with great power and prowess. They do all sorts of things that we mortals can only meagerly be envious of.

That is why their behavior seems so similar to ordinary mortal humans.

The puranas tell of the pastimes of the Devas and of the monarchs that ruled the earth. The puranas are histories and those histories where originally re-told by the witnesses present. The present puranas represent the fashion that the various puranic stories have been passed down. So if two witnesses to a God cursing another God record recount and re-tell a story they will appear somewhat slanted in some way. But if you read all the puranas then a grander house is seen that contains a network of contected events seperated by degrees of seperation.
 
Last edited:

Sumit

Sanatana Dharma
Oh?

I have been reading the Puranas since I was a teen. I have never read Brahma has three heads. But I do see your statement as contradictory to the puranas.



The different puranas supplement each other. Contradictions are due to time and place of the story of each purana. Each story can be kalpas apart in time and setting. Each story can be yugas, manus, kalpas or even Brahma's life time apart in time and setting from each other.
I really like to believe in Puranas but I do not get my answers so I leave them. May be you can provide me answers. I will be very thankful to it. I do not disregard puranas completely but they are either imaginary or corrupted to large extent.
 

Sumit

Sanatana Dharma
Shiva was born of Brahma. Brahma is Shiva's Son.
If Shiva is born of Brahma than How brahma is shiva's son. Also acc to Vishnupurana Vishnu created Brahma



The Shiva, Brahma and the devas live celestial lives with great power and prowess. They do all sorts of things that we mortals can only meagerly be envious of.

That is why their behavior seems so similar to ordinary mortal humans.
So they are devas or demigods and not god. :)

However I will not debate further :D
 
Last edited:

Wannabe Yogi

Well-Known Member
I really like to believe in Puranas but I do not get my answers so I leave them. May be you can provide me answers. I will be very thankful to it. I do not disregard puranas completely but they are either imaginary or corrupted to large extent.

I tend to agree. There has been much interpolation in the puranas. Still there are parts of these texts that are beautiful beyond belief. The Guru Gita, Devi Gita, Chandi, Uddhava Gita, Adhyatma Ramayana and Adya Strotam are all scriptures that I have built my beliefs on.
 
If Shiva is born of Brahma

than How brahma is shiva's son.

Also acc to Vishnupurana Vishnu created Brahma

So they are devas or demigods and not god. :)

However I will not debate further :D

I am simply quoting bhagavata purana where the entire family relations are enumerated just like the bible does. Yes Vishnu begot Brahma and Brahma Begot Shiva along with many many brothers and sisters of Shiva on and on and on. It is there in the BP.

I have never read or heard any pastime where Brahma was born from Shiva.

Shiva is heralded by his devotees, and IMO the vaishnavs Shiva can be seen, esoterically, as balaram's personal plenary expansion energy here in the material world. Its not about power plays, its about the mellows of transcedental brotherhood.
 
Hi Mohini,

I have heard this before but I am wondering where is it written and explained? I would really like to look into this if you can help me :)

Hari bol Maduri-ji,

Honestly I can't remember if prabhupad directly said this. But it seems that is what he wrote.

Bhaktivedanta Swami's Purports to Bhagavata purana 10.1.69.
Bhaktivedanta Swami's Purports to Bhagavata purana 10.1.69.

Ramanujacarya sometimes accepts Baladeva as a saktyavesa-avatara, but Srila Jiva Gosvami has explained that Baladeva is an expansion of Krishna and that a part of Baladeva is Sankarsana. Although Baladeva is identical with Sankarsana, He is the origin of Sankarsana. Therefore the word svaraö has been used to indicate that Baladeva always exists in His own independence. The word svaraö also indicates that Baladeva is beyond the material conception of existence. Maya cannot attract Him, but because He is fully independent, He can appear by His spiritual potency wherever He likes. Maya is fully under the control of Visnu. Because the material potency and yogamaya mingle in the Lord’s appearance, they are described as ekanaàsa. Sometimes ekanamsa is interpreted to mean “without differentiation.” Sankarsana and Sesa-naga are identical. As stated by Yamunadevi, “O Rama, O great-armed master of the world, who have extended Yourself throughout the entire universe by one plenary
expansion, it is not possible to understand You fully.” Therefore ekaàsa refers to Sesa-naga. In other words, Baladeva, merely by His partial expansion, sustains the entire universe.

Bhaktivedanta Swami's Purports to Chatanya Caramrita Adi-lila 5.10.

According to expert opinion, Balarama, as the chief of the original quadruple forms, is also the original Sankarsana. Balarama, the first expansion of Krishna, expands Himself in five forms: (1) Maha-sankarsana, (2) Karanabdhisayi, (3) Garbhodakasayi, (4) Ksirodakasayi, and (5) Sesa. These five plenary portions are responsible for both the spiritual and material cosmic manifestations. In these five forms Lord Balarama assists Lord Krishna in His activities. The first four of these forms are responsible for the cosmic manifestations, whereas Sesa is responsible for personal service to the Lord. Sesa is called Ananta, or unlimited, because He assists the Personality of Godhead in His unlimited expansions by performing an unlimited variety of services. Sri Balarama is the servitor Godhead who serves Lord Krishna in all affairs of existence and knowledge.

I look forward to hear what you think. If its not too contentious a topic.
 
Last edited:
You made a typo in post #31.



Hence the confusion.

Yes I did. Thank you!
Wow could have caused a casscade of confusion.
Sorry I didn't catch it at the start. Sorry.

I said *Shiva was born of Brahma. Brahma is Shiva's Son.*

I meant to say *Shiva was born of Brahma. Shiva is Brahma's Son.*
 
Top