Nāsṭika Ṣaiva Vachana Khanḍana. (Part 2)
Hare Krishna
All Glories To Sri Guru And Sri Gauranga!
Let us continue from PART 3.
We all know the infamous statement Kāyakavē Kailāsa of Basavanna,
which explicitly means "work is worship".
Now let us the shortcomings of this vachana.
How can work be worship? Can a lingayat ever answer this question? God is self-satisfied, or purnananda, filled with infinite joy and bliss. How can an insignificant soul doing his kāyaka or work convince him(god) to liberate him or make his kāyaka as kailasa, the yajur veda says, ṭad viṣnor paramam paḍam, meaning the abode of vishnu,i.e., vaikunta is the highest. even if it is otherwise, how can material activities be considered as kailasa or vaikunta? Is their false god, desperate for the results of the work of his devotees, is this concept copied from abrahamic religion again? where god desires some work from his devotees inorder to give them something? God who is free of all desires, grants liberation and his abode(vaikunta) by his causeless mercy, even the bible, says,
Ephesians 2:8
For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;
It is below the dignity of a true vaidika to use the shastras, to refute them, to prove bhakti above karma khanda.
Any faith which disregards the fact that spirituality is inherent within us since eternity and the mood to render service to godhead is dormant within all of us as we being parts of god it becomes natural for our constitutional positions to be with god in joy, is not a bona fide religion. It is our forgetfulness which makes us forget the eternal relationship between us and god. The fact that Basava states that work is worship, contradicts this, as he considers material work to be worship, it proves that, he did not know that the love for god is inherent within us and all forms of true religion would address this fact, but as Basava doesn't address to the love of god which is indwelling within all souls, which stands as a testimony for any true religion, we can discard his philosophy as false, more to this he states something opposite to the truth, when he says something temporary,such as work is ultimate.As when a soul quits the body, the work or kayaka is of no use, and does that mean there is no kailasa after death of the body? Following this means denouncing the love of god, and further being ignorant of the love inherent within us, so this has to be junked by all means. Love for god is vaikunta or let be kailasa, not work which is the mere means of maintaining the body, which has nothing to do with the spirit soul or the eternal relationship of it woth god.
Let us come to Akkamahadevi,
She claims lord shiva to be her husband, while lord shiva is the highest of the bhakti yogis, who follows all the injunctions of the vedic literature, who is a faithful husband. He is not sakala guṇa paripūrṇa, unlike krishna who can reciprocate with his devotees in the māḍurya rasa.
She is sahajiyavādī, for those who do not know what sahjiyavāda is, then, some people, in vrindavan, pseudo devotees, consider themselves to be incarnation of gopis in the goloka dhama, and have taken birth to uplift the human race, they are basically the ones, who smear matte makeup, to showcase themselves as gopis, or the ones who is especially close to krishna. Now Akkamahadevi, though no solid evidence, considers herself to be an elevated soul, she was drowned in so much ignorance that she probably, forgot that the lingayats, criticise the vedas, and considered their false god to be male, as she calls him her husband. How does she know that their god is male? Well when they condemn every aspect of the vedas, and abuse them..........
Plus she renounced everything, to preach her fallacy, somewhat like that of a sanyasi, as they believe in the blind equality between the two genders, srila prabhupada says, women never gets sanyasa, there were some cases in the vedic era where some women got sanyasa, but those were exceptional, no school of vedanta, has ever given sanyasa to women despite of differences between them, even if a women gets sanyasa, she is considered to be a prostitute, and the one who just imitates to be a sanyasi, so Akkamahadevi tries to imitate sanyasis,which is not sanctioned by any scriptures, apart from the bogus lingayat texts.
The above picture: Dry lingayat mayavadi rituals, which makes no sense.
The joyous celebration of the vaishnavas.
On what basis can the authority of the veda vyasa can be establish.
śāstrayonitvāt (1.1.3)
Acharya Madhva comments :-
Acharya Madhva quotes Taittiriya Brahmana and exclusively says that who has not studied Vedas can not understand the Perfect God. Here words are important as God is perfect so is Vedas and other scriptures which supports the conclusion of Vedas.
In support to his interpretation of Brahma Sutras 1.1.3, Sripad Madhvacharya quotes Skanda Puran (not restricting himself to only Mahabharata as some might not be aware of it) :-
Hence only Rik, Yajus, Saman and Atharva Vedas, the Maha Bharata and the Mula Ramayana and also whatever agrees with these is to be considered as Sastras.
Sripad Madhvacharya again quotes the same in his Mahabharat Tatparya Nirnaya Chapter 10 named Vyasavataranuvarnanam :-
Mahabharat Tatparyna Nirnaya published from Shri Palimaru Matha makes it very clear that :-
Objection :- Tamasatva of Sattvik Puranas like Padma are clearly shown because they praise Siva.
Refutation :- Acharya Madhva have nicely cleared all the stance when he said in Chapter 1 named Sarvashastrartha Nirnaya (Mahabharat Tatparya Nirnaya) that :-
Herer the word section is used and it should be clearly understood which is again explained here in the explanation of above verses in the same edition of Mahabharata Tatparya Nirnaya :-
Padma Puran establish supremacy of Lord Vishnu in Purva- Paksha and Uttara Paksha way. Hence in no way it can labelled as Tamsic Puran.
Objection :- If anyone says Matsya Purana is tamasik, why accept it's verses of tamasa, rajasa, sattva classification ?
Refutation :- Acharya Madhva again makes it very clear in his Mahabharat Tatparya Nirnaya (Chapter 1: Sarvashastrartha Nirnaya) that :-
Since as said in Vedant Sutras that only scriptures can reveal Lord Hari and since he is the conclusion of all sastras as said :-
Bhagavad Gita 15.15
“vEdaischa sarvaihi ahamEva vEdyO”
All the Vedas describe Sri Krishna alone.
vede ramayane caiva purane bharate tatha
adavante ca madhye ca visnu sarvatra giyate |
Harivamsa“In the Vedas, Ramayana, Puranas and the Mahabharata, from the beginning till end, and also in the middle, Visnu is glorified everywhere.”
III In fact all the devatas have kept the name of Sri Hari just we name kids after Gods and great personalities all Gods have taken names of the Supreme God Sri Krishna.
Hence anything which supports Lord Krishna supremacy should be accepted based upon pramanas of scriptures :-
87. In the Sāttvika Kalpas the greatness of Hari is supreme. They know that the greatness of Brahmā reigns supreme in the Rājasa Kalpas. (Skanda Puran - Prabhasa Ksetra Mahatmya, Chapter 2)
88. Similarly the greatness of Śiva is to be found in the Tāmasa Kalpas. In a Purāṇa of a mixed nature, the greatness of Sarasvatī and Pitṛs is narrated.
That’s why Acharya Madhva said in Chapter 1 of Mahabharat Tatparya Nirnaya that :-
Objection :- It can easily said that Vyāsa was subject to delusion while authoring those texts if someone argues he wrote those texts to delude the tamsik people or to guide them ?
Refutation :- Vyasa was not subjected to delusion because as Bhagavad Gita says :-
svabhāvo ’dhyātmam ucyate (Bhagavad Gita 8.3)
ie eternal nature of a Jiva is called adhyātma.
Hence you can’t change their eternal nature immediately and they can be elevated using Tamsic Scripture from Tamas and then to Rajas and then to Sattva and so to say Tamsic Puran is a harem or peace of waste as it will gradually improve then the problem lies in nature of the individual and not in Vyasa as Vyasa clearly told in Srimad Bhagavatam after composing all the sastras that :-
A person who executes his occupational duty properly for one hundred births becomes qualified to occupy the post of Brahmā, and if he becomes more qualified, he can approach Lord Śiva. A person who is directly surrendered to Lord Kṛṣṇa, or Viṣṇu, in unalloyed devotional service is immediately promoted to the spiritual planets. Lord Śiva and other demigods attain these planets after the destruction of this material world. (SB 4.24.29)
Hence as scripture themselves says devotees of Lord Shiv can only be elevated gradually, therefore if immediate improvement is required then one should resort to the Supreme Brahman himself who is Lord Hari hence fault on Vyasa Part is rejected if one properly tries to understand what our Acharyas and Vaishanva Purans wanted to say. Bhakti of Lord Krishna is as powerful as Lord and he guarantees suddha satva and eternal dham to his devotees.
(Image :- Bhagwan Vyas Deva)
Objection :- Garudapurana gets invalidated itself by saying Vishnu and Bhagavata are purely sattvikam ?
Refutation :- Srimad Bhagavatam is natural commentary on Vedant Sutras so it’s position will always be highest and Srimad Bhagavatam itself proves that by stating :-
Completely rejecting all religious activities which are materially motivated, this Bhāgavata Purāṇa propounds the highest truth, which is understandable by those devotees who are fully pure in heart. The highest truth is reality distinguished from illusion for the welfare of all. Such truth uproots the threefold miseries. This beautiful Bhāgavatam, compiled by the great sage Vyāsadeva [in his maturity], is sufficient in itself for God realization. What is the need of any other scripture? As soon as one attentively and submissively hears the message of Bhāgavatam, by this culture of knowledge the Supreme Lord is established within his heart. (ŚB 1.1.2)
And Vishnu Puran too lays the highest truth in the same manner by focusing on rejecting the religious activities which are materially motivated though our Acharyas have proved Srimad Bhagavatam to be highest of all Purans.
Objection :- Shaiva Agamas are higher authority than Vaishanva Agamas.
Refutation :- Scriptures says :-
purANaiSca vedaiSca pA'ncarAtraistathaiva ca | dhyAyanti yogino nityam kratubhiSca yajanti tam || (RamAyaNa, uttara. 7.16)
sA'nkhyam yogam pA'ncarAtram vedAraNyakameva ca | j~nAnAnyetAni brahmarshe lokeshu pracaranti ha || (mahA. SAnti. 359, verse 1)
idam mahopanishadam caturveda samanvitam | sA'nkhya yoga kRtAntena pa'ncarAtrAnuSabditam || nArAyaNa mukhodgIrNam nArado'SrAvayat purA | (mahA. Santi. 348.62-3)
Thus Lord Krsna is alone sung in Vedas, Ramayana and Mahabharata and Pancharatra and any scripture which contradicts this theory needs to be understood and reinterpreted to hail the supremacy of Lord Krishna.
(Image :- Acharya Madhva)
True glories of Vedvayas will be when we continue to represent his siddhanta as it is while accepting at the same time the statement of sastras :-
कृष्णद्वैपायनं व्यासं विद्धि नारायणं प्रभुम् । कोऽन्यो हि भुवि मैत्रेय महाभारतकृद भवेत् ।।
But know, O Maitreya, that Śrī Krşņa-Dvaipāyana Vyāsa is Śrī Nārāyaṇa Himself. Who else in this world could have brought forth the great epic Mahābhārata? (Visnu Purana 3.4.5)
Follwing commentators have commented on Ved Vyasa’s Vedant Sutras to establish their philosophy and all of have them praised Ved Vyasa to the extreme in their Bhasya :-
Just showing Srikantha (widely regarded as The first Shaiva Acharya to comment upon Brahma Sutras who supports Brahman being material cause as per Vedant Sutras ) :-
Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī who quotes a verse from Śkanda Purāṇa itself and proves how Lord Kṣīrodhakṣāyī Viṣṇu himself appeared as Lord Bādarāyaṇa when Brahma, Śiva etc people approached the milk ocean. He continued to prove how Lord Bādarāyaṇa's knowledge is like a vast ocean (one reason being he is the Lord Himself) :-
स्कान्द एव
“नारायणाद्विनिष्पन्नं ज्ञानं कृतयुगे स्थितम् । किञ्चित्तदन्यथा जातं त्रेतायां द्वापरेऽखिलम् ॥ गौतमस्य ऋषेः शापाज्ज्ञाने त्वज्ञानतां गते । सङ्कीर्णबुद्धयो देवा ब्रह्म-रुद्र-पुरःसराः ॥ शरण्यं शरणं जग्मुर्नारायणमनामयम् । तैर्विज्ञापितकार्यस्तु भगवान् पुरुषोत्तमः ॥ अवतीर्णो महायोगी सत्यवत्यां पराशरात् । उत्सन्नान् भगवान् वेदानुज्जहार हरिः स्वयम् ॥” इति ।
The Skanda Purāņa states, "In Satya-yuga the knowledge that emanated from Lord Nārāyaṇa remained pure. It became somewhat polluted in Treta-yuga and completely so in Dvapara-yuga. When ignorance had covered that knowledge because of Gautama Ṛsi's curse, the demigods became perplexed. Led by Brahma and Rudra, they approached Lord Narayana, the Supreme Person and faultless protector, and told Him why they had come. On the request of the demigods, Lord Hari then descended as the great yogi Vyasa, son of Satyavati and Parasara, and reestablished the forgotten Vedas."
-Śrītattva Sandarbha 16.3
“I offer my respectful obeisances unto the six Gosvamis–Sri Rupa Gosvami, Sri Sanatana Gosvami, Sri Raghunatha Bhatta Gosvami, Sri Raghunatha dasa Gosvami, Sri Jiva Gosvami, and Sri Gopala Bhatta Gosvami–who cast off all aristocratic association as insignificant. To deliver poor, conditioned souls, they accepted loincloths and became mendicants, but they were always merged in the ecstatic ocean of the gopis’ love for Krsna, and they were always bathing repeatedly in the waves of that ocean.”
Some Vachanakaras also ridiculed the hard vratas or practices, though fasting etc has scientific and spiritual benefits, they do not deserve a response, chanting of the lord's names is higher than any kinds of yagnas, vratas etc, more easier than the lingayat practices.
Chant this Mahamantra and be Happy.
Hare Krsna Hare Krsna Krsna Krsna Hare Hare Hare Rama Hare Rama Rama Rama Hare Hare
Your Aspiring Servant,
Hare Krishna
ṣri kṛṣnārpaṇamasṭu!
सर्वं एवं मम हृदयं राज्यं कृत्वा मम प्रेमविषयं श्री अप्रमेय श्री श्रीराधाव्रजचन्द्राय च समर्प्यते।
Everything thus is offered to the lord who reigns my heart, and who is the object of my love, Sri Aprameya and Sri Sri Radha Vrajachandra.
Comments
Post a Comment