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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Puranic stories are reasonIs there a special reason why Brahma unlike Shiva and Vishnu is not worshipped?
Is there a special reason why Brahma unlike Shiva and Vishnu is not worshipped?
The puranas are self contradictory. The concept of three headed brahma itself comes from puranas.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.
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanielR
Is there a special reason why Brahma unlike Shiva and Vishnu is not worshipped?
Puranic stories are reason
The puranas are self contradictory. The concept of three headed brahma itself comes from puranas.
The puranas are self contradictory.
Well Vedas clearly states that brahmh created Universe and it is formless--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.
According to Puranas Brahma was cursed by shiva.
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.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.
If Shiva is born of Brahma than How brahma is shiva's son. Also acc to Vishnupurana Vishnu created BrahmaShiva was born of Brahma. Brahma is Shiva's Son.
So they are devas or demigods and not god.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.
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.
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
as balaram's personal plenary expansion energy here in the material world.
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
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 Lords 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 have never read or heard any pastime where Brahma was born from Shiva.
Shiva was born of Brahma. Brahma is Shiva's Son.
You made a typo in post #31.
Hence the confusion.
That's Brahmh ofen referred as Brahman who is creator maintainer and destroyer of Universe.