Shiva and Vishnu

[sravna]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Dear Shri Sangom,

I confess I have just begun to ponder the questions that you have raised and am in a sense, thinking aloud in this forum. That is the reason I welcome any rational thoughts that would aid understanding in this regard. Let me share my own views though I have yet to form any firm conclusions.

It is said in the scriptures that Shiva is the destroyer and Vishnu is the protector. That is the primary role. Since the role of Shiva is destruction we can assume it has to do with physical destruction as we don't try to destroy the mind, we only try to elevate it. Similarly since the role of Vishnu is protecting, we assume it is protecting the mind as the physical body being temporary, its protection makes less sense.

The crucial point now is that since Shiva is the destroyer of the physical any deterioration or destruction happening anytime and anywhere of the physical may be considered due to Shiva's influence. Similarly shedding of ego and other such undesirable mental aspects happening anywhere and anytime may be said to be due to Vishnu's influence.

Thus by making physical existence temporary, the scope is adharma is checked because all the adharma is based on excessive material and physical attachment. Similarly by cleansing the mind the scope for dharma is enhanced . Thus these two together act all the time everywhere to let dharma prevail over adharma eventually. The results may not be immediately evident as the mechanism used, which is the mechanism of karma doesn't give such immediate and obvious reactions , for good reasons I believe. So we can see undesirable events temporarily and more so in the dwapara and kali yugas.

Finally, Vishnu might have killed asuras and Shiva might have played the role of protector but these are not their defining roles. Other gods such as Ganesha, Muruga , Shakthi have also played both the roles. So I think we need to stick to what their primary role is.

 

[renuka]

Dear Sravna,

Sometimes I fail to understand why we even need to do dissection of every form of Divinity.
As far as I know of you subscribe to HOLISTIC thinking where you rather look through broad spectrum lenses...so my honest question to you is.."what do we really achieve from re defining or even actually creating some new divisions in our outlook"

Tell me frankly..how does Advaita fit into this if we are going to go back to square one where we try to imagine God sitting in some deified form up above heaven and directing everything with a magic wand..in this case either with a Cakra or a Trishul.

As I wrote earlier I would like to view things as the Vishnu Principle and the Shiva Principle.

Discussing things based on principles is more Advaitic and gives us less guilt of trying to describe and define God.

 

[sankara_sharmah]

Shiva the Destroyer, Vishnu the preserver, Brahma the creator. These are purely academic classification. Most of these classification are Vaishnavite in origin.

When we pray to a God/Goddess we address them as paraBhraman the supreme reality. When we pray to Vinayaka he is the ultimate God. When we pray to Shiva he is the Ultimate God.

Before you post contradicting this please go through the common slokas we recite. They will confirm this.

If the Hindus considered Shiva as only a Destroyer , would they pray to him?

These academic classification which was done by scholars who were affiliated to different sects does not have any relevance in the Hinduism we practice.

 

[sangom]

Dear Shri Sangom,

I confess I have just begun to ponder the questions that you have raised and am in a sense, thinking aloud in this forum. That is the reason I welcome any rational thoughts that would aid understanding in this regard. Let me share my own views though I have yet to form any firm conclusions.

It is said in the scriptures that Shiva is the destroyer and Vishnu is the protector. That is the primary role. Since the role of Shiva is destruction we can assume it has to do with physical destruction as we don't try to destroy the mind, we only try to elevate it. Similarly since the role of Vishnu is protecting, we assume it is protecting the mind as the physical body being temporary, its protection makes less sense.

The crucial point now is that since Shiva is the destroyer of the physical any deterioration or destruction happening anytime and anywhere of the physical may be considered due to Shiva's influence. Similarly shedding of ego and other such undesirable mental aspects happening anywhere and anytime may be said to be due to Vishnu's influence.

Thus by making physical existence temporary, the scope is adharma is checked because all the adharma is based on excessive material and physical attachment. Similarly by cleansing the mind the scope for dharma is enhanced . Thus these two together act all the time everywhere to let dharma prevail over adharma eventually. The results may not be immediately evident as the mechanism used, which is the mechanism of karma doesn't give such immediate and obvious reactions , for good reasons I believe. So we can see undesirable events temporarily and more so in the dwapara and kali yugas.

Finally, Vishnu might have killed asuras and Shiva might have played the role of protector but these are not their defining roles. Other gods such as Ganesha, Muruga , Shakthi have also played both the roles. So I think we need to stick to what their primary role is.

Dear Shri Sravna,

The problem in such half-cooked speculations is that one tends to consider just one statement and that too all out of context; you have just taken what the priestly class concocted in order to justify their new idea of "avataara" for their own vested interests; vishnu is the preserver, shiva is the destroyer and you are trying to make some highfaluting philosophy from this one statement.

But you forget that the whole scripture baggage itself is a bundle of fabrications from time to time. The same scriptures talk about samudra manthana, do they not? After the first 1000 years of churning, the serpent vaasuki could no longer bear the torture and vomited haalaahala, the all-destructive poison. Vaalmeeki describes it as follows :

उत्पपाताम् अग्नि संकाशम् हालाहल महाविषम् |
तेन दग्धम् जगत् सर्वम् स देव असुर मानुषम् || १-४५-२०

(utpapātām agni saṃkāśam hālāhala mahāviṣam |
tena dagdham jagat sarvam sa deva asura mānuṣam || 1-45-20)

This poison burnt down (dagdham), the entire universe (jagat sarvam sa deva asura mānuṣam) including the devas and asuras.

At that point of time there was no trace of Vishnu anywhere nearby and it was Shiva whom the as yet unkilled devas approached crying for protection. Again, see Vaalmeeki :—

अथ देवा महादेवम् शंकरम् शरणार्थ्तिनः |
जग्मुः पशुपतिम् रुद्रम् त्राहि त्राहि इति तुष्टुवुः || १-४५-२१

atha devā mahādevam śaṃkaram śaraṇārthtinaḥ |
jagmuḥ paśupatim rudram trāhi trāhi iti tuṣṭuvuḥ || 1-45-21


The gods seeking shelter then approached Rudra, the Cardinal God, Endower of Solace, and who husbands all the created animals inclusive of human-animals, namely Shiva, and they prayed to him saying 'save, save us.

एवम् उक्तः ततो देवैः देवेश्वरः प्रभुः |
प्रादुर् आसीत् ततो अत्र एव शंख चक्र धरो हरिः || १-४५-२२

evam uktaḥ tato devaiḥ deveśvaraḥ prabhuḥ |
prādur āsīt tato atra eva śaṃkha cakra dharo hariḥ || 1-45-22


This way while the gods are praying the Lord and God of Gods, namely Shiva, then handling his disc and conch-shell Vishnu has also revealed himself at that place. [1-45-22]

उवाच एनम् स्मितम् कृत्वा रुद्रम् शूलधरम् हरिः |
दैवतैः मध्यमानो तु तत् पूर्वम् समुपस्थितम् || १-४५-२३
तत् त्वदीयम् सुरश्रेष्ठः सुराणाम् अग्रतो हि यत् |
अग्र पूजामि इह स्थित्वा गृहाण इदम् विषम् प्रभो || १-४५-२४

uvāca enam smitam kṛtvā rudram śūladharam hariḥ |
daivataiḥ madhyamāno tu tat pūrvam samupasthitam || 1-45-23
tat tvadīyam suraśreṣṭhaḥ surāṇām agrato hi yat |
agra pūjāmi iha sthitvā gṛhāṇa idam viṣam prabho || 1-45-24


And Vishnu smilingly spoke to wielder of trident Rudra, 'oh, god the best, whatever element that has emerged from the churning of Milk Ocean by gods, that shall belong to you, isn't it. By virtue of your position as the foremost god among gods, oh, omnicompetent god Shiva, you please accept this poison applying yourself to that position of foremost god, and deeming this poison, haalahala, as a foremost oblation to your godhood. [1-45-23, 24]

(Valmiki Ramayana - Baala Kanda - Sarga 45 )

See also how vishnu cunningly interferes between the devas and shiva and sort of "needles" shiva to drink the poison. Who then will you, with all your notions of dharma and adharma, vote for as the one who saved the entire jagat from being destroyed, shiva who readily had the courage and broadmindedness to save the universe by drinking the poison, or the sly, cunning vishnu who himself is afraid of drinking the poison but plays a sort of trick in order that the impossible job does not come to him but goes to shiva? If I were still an ardent believer in the gods and all, I will not touch vishnu, the schemer, and undependable, even by a barge pole but will opt to be a devotee of shiva, the trustworthy.

 

[prasad1]

Mr. Sangom sir,
The more detail you throw on the subject, these characters become less likable. I would rather revert back to Advaita philosophy. LOL

I agree with Ms. Renuka's statement.

Discussing things based on principles is more Advaitic and gives us less guilt of trying to describe and define God.

 

[sankara_sharmah]

Who assigned these roles? Some GOD who was above them all? NO. These roles were assigned by people who wrote Puranas.

 

[Visalakshi Ramani]

Who assigned these roles? Some GOD who was above them all? NO. These roles were assigned by people who wrote Puranas.

So that explains pretty well why God becomes less and less likable

when we endow Him with with more and more of human qualities!

 

[sravna]

Dear Shri Sangom and Dear Renuka,

In order to understand brahman I think most of us need to understand the lesser realities. That I think is the whole idea of the physical world. Just like you cannot start your education with a Ph.D. Or we need to be like such blessed souls as Adi Sankara or Ramanuja that we grasp the reality all at once. I would endeavor to make sense of the basics first than mixing up all levels of knowledge and getting confused or misled.

Advaita is my guiding philosophy no doubt but it doesn't make it taboo for me to do any sort of analysis at all. I think I am not wrong in saying that even Sankara did a great deal of analysis in his lifetime.

 

[prasad1]

Dear Shri Sangom and Dear Renuka,

In order to understand brahman I think most of us need to understand the lesser realities. That I think is the whole idea of the physical world. Just like you cannot start your education with a Ph.D. Or we need to be like such blessed souls as Adi Sankara or Ramanuja that we grasp the reality all at once. I would endeavor to make sense of the basics first than mixing up all levels of knowledge and getting confused or misled.

Advaita is my guiding philosophy no doubt but it doesn't make it taboo for me to do any sort of analysis. I suspect even Sankara did a great deal of analysis during his lifetime.

I understand your POV.
When I was a child, it was fascinating that the Sun and moon all seemed to revolve around the earth, and not knowing any better we accepted that to be the truth. Parents too let you believe that as an easy way out of explaining the reality. But now knowing the facts, it is very difficult for me to go back to my childhood concept of "earth as center of universe". Similarly having accepted and being comfortable with Advaita philosophy, it is very difficult for me to go back to these "avatar" history and their pettiness.
Some can accept it I suppose. That is why when some zealots make those comments I ignore them, but when a person of your stature says it I would like to understand the reason. LOL

 

[sangom]

Mr. Sangom sir,
The more detail you throw on the subject, these characters become less likable. I would rather revert back to Advaita philosophy. LOL

I agree with Ms. Renuka's statement.

Dear Shri Prasad,

I think people should realize how ill-informed they are about their religion, scriptures, etc., and that they are being like zombies before a set of vested interests who would like to keep their grip on people's minds tight so that these gullible zombies will pour in money to temples, mutts and pravachanakartas, Radha-kalyanam and so on.

If you ask me, even advaita is no different. Sankara failed to explain his concept clearly even to his direct disciples so that soon after his time the Bhaamati and Vivarana Schools came into being; still the question of maayaa is defeating these advaitin scholars. During the last century, Swami Sacchidanandendra Saraswathi of Holenarsipur has propounded what may be termed a new school of thought. While the advaitins seem to be groping for a suitable solution to the problem, the victor is visishtadvaita.

 

[renuka]

While the advaitins seem to be groping for a suitable solution to the problem, the victor is visishtadvaita.

Dear Sangom ji,


One may emerge a victor in a religious debate of the Advaita Vs Vishistadvaita kind but the person who ultimately wears the crown is a person who has faith.. who might not have even participated in the debate.

 

[Visalakshi Ramani]

If knowledge VS Faith...
I prefer to remain ignorant
rather than give up my faith!

 

[Visalakshi Ramani]

Surrender and BECOME free!

Children are living examples for this.

They trust their parents (creators)
and are taken care of by their creators.

But grow ups and those have developed
their heads without developing their hearts,
would rather struggle and suffer in silence
than surrender unconditionally and smile.

 

[sankara_sharmah]

नायमात्मा प्रवचनेन लभ्यो
न मेधया न बहुना श्रुतेन।
यमेवैष वृणुते तेन लभ्य-
स्तस्यैष आत्मा विवृणुते तनूं स्वाम्‌॥ ३॥

nāyamātmā pravacanena labhyo
na medhayā na bahunā śrutena |
yamevaiṣa vṛṇute tena labhya-
stasyaiṣa ātmā vivṛṇute tanūṁ svām || 3||

You cannot have the knowledge of the Supreme Soul by
means of reasoning, erudition, or studying of the Vedas;
Only through causeless mercy does He reveal His own
person unto him whom He does accept as His own

--Mundaka Upanishad 3.2.3

 

[suraju06]

Sangom in Shiva and Vishnu post #29:

Dear Sir,

I read your post and I am sad. It is as if I was reading what is presented in a third rate DK tabloid or as if I was listening to a street corner lecture of a DK paid speaker. What an arrogance. And what a scheming. Sir, you are guilty of the same scheming that you have accused one of the Godheads Vishnu of. I am not angry. So I am coolly dealing with the kind of views that you are putting up here. I do not believe that there exists many Gods. And so I am not writing this in support of one God (Vishnu) against another God (Shiva)-the wedge that my friend Prasad had already warned of. I am writing this to just show how hollow your arguments are. You are very knowledgeable and yet you have chosen to selectively misquote, misinterpret and trivialise passages from Valmiki Ramayana, all this because you are sold on your pet prejudices. Now my criticism:

But you forget that the whole scripture baggage itself is a bundle of fabrications from time to time. The same scriptures talk about samudra manthana, do they not? After the first 1000 years of churning, the serpent vaasuki could no longer bear the torture and vomited haalaahala, the all-destructive poison. Vaalmeeki describes it as follows :

उत्पपाताम् अग्नि संकाशम् हालाहल महाविषम् |
तेन दग्धम् जगत् सर्वम् स देव असुर मानुषम् || १-४५-२०

(utpapātām agni saṃkāśam hālāhala mahāviṣam |
tena dagdham jagat sarvam sa deva asura mānuṣam || 1-45-20)

This poison burnt down (dagdham), the entire universe (jagat sarvam sa deva asura mānuṣam) including the devas and asuras.

At that point of time there was no trace of Vishnu anywhere nearby and it was Shiva whom the as yet unkilled devas approached crying for protection.

Dear Sangom Sir,Where is the info given by you that “there was no trace of Vishnu anywhere nearby” in these lines given by you:

Again, see Vaalmeeki :—
अथ देवा महादेवम् शंकरम् शरणार्थ्तिनः |
जग्मुः पशुपतिम् रुद्रम् त्राहि त्राहि इति तुष्टुवुः || १-४५-२१

atha devā mahādevam śaṃkaram śaraṇārthtinaḥ |
jagmuḥ paśupatim rudram trāhi trāhi iti tuṣṭuvuḥ || 1-45-21

The gods seeking shelter then approached Rudra, the Cardinal God, Endower of Solace, and who husbands all the created animals inclusive of human-animals, namely Shiva, and they prayed to him saying 'save, save us.

Again you are off the mark sir. Pasupathi here means protector of embodied spirits and not animals. The word pasu signifies an imagery in which the spirits are indicated as they are held in bondage inside the body. I am sure you know translation of Sanskrit slokas is not done just like ஆனைக்கு அர்ரம் என்றால் குதிரைக்கு குர்ரம். I checked up many translations of Valmiki Ramayan and did not find a single instance where pasupathi in this context interpreted as one who husbands ‘animals inclusive of human-animals’. Okay. Will you please let me know what is a human- animal? We all know humans and animals but about human-animals we have absolutely no idea. May be the western scholars on whom you depend for sourcing knowledge know about such animals.

एवम् उक्तः ततो देवैः देवेश्वरः प्रभुः |
प्रादुर् आसीत् ततो अत्र एव शंख चक्र धरो हरिः || १-४५-२२
evam uktaḥ tato devaiḥ deveśvaraḥ prabhuḥ |
prādur āsīt tato atra eva śaṃkha cakra dharo hariḥ || 1-45-22

This way while the gods are praying the Lord and God of Gods, namely Shiva, then handling his disc and conch-shell Vishnu has also revealed himself at that place. [1-45-22]

If he revealed himself at that place where was he? Far away from there? If so where is the sloka saying that he was far away? In your overanxiety to cover vishnu in a villain’s attire you have gone overboard sir.

And you proceed further to commit more and more of this in your soliloquy. Please read this:

See also how vishnu cunningly interferes between the devas and shiva and sort of "needles" shiva to drink the poison. Who then will you, with all your notions of dharma and adharma, vote for as the one who saved the entire jagat from being destroyed, shiva who readily had the courage and broadmindedness to save the universe by drinking the poison, or the sly, cunning vishnu who himself is afraid of drinking the poison but plays a sort of trick in order that the impossible job does not come to him but goes to shiva? If I were still an ardent believer in the gods and all, I will not touch vishnu, the schemer, and undependable, even by a barge pole but will opt to be a devotee of shiva, the trustworthy.

You conveniently left out the very next few lines in Valmiki Ramayana (1-45-27 to 30) which speaks about how they proceeded further with the churning of the ocean when the Mandara sank into the ocean and when they prayed to Vishnu how he took an avatar and jacked up the mandara. Does this not satisfy your requirements of broadmindedness, not shirking an impossible job, not being sly and cunning etc.? Or would you still not touch Vishnu with a barge pole? And can you tell where was Shiva when mandara sank? As long as you speak about there being no multiple Gods I am with you but when you move into the territory of atheism and start driving a wedge as one of the methods to argue your case I become critical of your views. I respect your knowledge, the keen eye for details and the effort you make at your age.

Cheers.

 

[Visalakshi Ramani]

A classic story by Ramakrishna parama hamsa to show what happens
when knowledge VS faith.

இடைப்பெண்.



அந்தண குரு ஒருவருக்குத் தவறாமல் பால்
அனுதினம் வழங்கும் ஒரு சிறு இடைப்பெண்;
ஆற்றைத் தாண்டி வரவேண்டி இருந்ததால்,
ஏற்றுக்கொண்ட நேரத்துக்கு வருவதே இல்லை!

ஒரு நாள் கூறினார் அந்த குரு அவளிடம்,
“சம்சாரக் கடலையே நம்மால் தாண்ட முடியும்;
ஒரு ஆற்றை உன்னால் தாண்ட முடியாதா?
சரசரவென்று நீ நீர்மேல் நடந்து வருவாய்!”

குருவிடம் முழு நம்பிக்கை கொண்ட பெண்
மறுநாள் முதல் விரைந்து வரலானாள்;
குரு கேட்டார் அப்பெண்ணிடம், “இப்போது
வருகின்றாயே நேரத்தோடு! எப்படி?” என்று.

“நீங்கள் சொன்னபடியே வருகின்றேன் ஐயா;
நீரைக் கடக்க நான் ஓடத்துக்கு நிற்பதில்லை!
ஓடத்துக்கு நின்றால் பொழுது ஆகிவிடும்;
நடந்து வருவதால் எனக்கு நேரம் மிச்சம்”

விக்கித்துப் போன குரு அவளிடம்,
“விரைந்து நடந்து காட்டு” என்று கூற,
விறு விறு என்று நீர் மேல் நடந்தாள்
வியத்தகு நம்பிக்கையுடன் அந்தப் பெண்.

திரும்பிப் பார்த்தவள் திகைத்து நின்றாள்.
தூக்கிய வஸ்திரத்துடன், நீரின் மேலே
நடக்க முடியாமல் நிற்கும் குருவினை.
நாவில் மட்டும் பகவான் நாமங்கள்!

“உங்கள் கடவுளின்மேல், குருவாகிய
உங்களுக்கே நம்பிக்கை இல்லையா?
நனைந்து விடுமோ வஸ்திரம் என்று
நினைந்து அஞ்சுகின்றீரே!” என்றாள்!

நினைத்தது நடக்கும், கேட்டது கிடைக்கும்,
மனத்தில் முழுதாக நம்பினால் மட்டுமே!
போதனை அனைவருக்கும் செய்யும் குரு
போதனை அன்று சிறுமியிடம் பெற்றார்.

வாழ்க வளமுடன்,
விசாலாக்ஷி ரமணி.

 

[Visalakshi Ramani]

When knowledge VS Faith...

THE MILK VENDOR.

A famous guru bought milk from a young girl who lived across a river. Everyday she would come late, as she has to wait for the boatman to cross the river.

The Guru asked her one day, when the people can cross the ocean of SamsArA, why she could not cross a mere river, just by walking on it!

From the next day the girl started coming very early. The Guru asked her the reason. She said that she did not wait for the boat man any more but just walked across the river as told by him.

They both set out to walk on the river. The girl turned back and found the Guru with his garment rolled up so that it would not get wet.

She wondered aloud whether he lacked the confidence in his own words and was afraid that his clothes would get wet?

On that day, the Guru learnt a valuable lesson from that poor, innocent and ignorant milk vending girl.

 

[sangom]

Dear Sangom ji,


One may emerge a victor in a religious debate of the Advaita Vs Vishistadvaita kind but the person who ultimately wears the crown is a person who has faith.. who might not have even participated in the debate.

Smt. Renuka,

None of us -those exulting after wearing the crown of faith as also those who say what they truly feel on the basis of their inherent intelligence - knows who wins after death. But in this world, and between the different Uttara meemaamsa philosophies, it looks (again) to me, that visishtadvaita has had its victory over advaita, going by the continuous debates between scholars of the two sects.

Show me one person who has ultimately worn the crown, please, through faith and faith alone! But not the 'likes' obtained in this thread or something like that.

 

[sravna]

I understand your POV.

Some can accept it I suppose. That is why when some zealots make those comments I ignore them, but when a person of your stature says it I would like to understand the reason. LOL

Dear Shri Prasad,

I know I do not have any malicious intention in starting this topic. It is only to try to understand better the rationale being what is said in the scriptures. There is so much that is said in the scriptures. This is just one of those that was said. I am of the conviction that by arriving at a good understanding we will not be denigrating one and extolling the other but better appreciate that there is nothing that differentiates in that way. That is the faith I have in the balance in the scriptures and that balance I think should be evident if one really puts in a sincere effort to understand the scriptures.

 

[tbs]

Dear Sangom ji,


One may emerge a victor in a religious debate of the Advaita Vs Vishistadvaita kind but the person who ultimately wears the crown is a person who has faith.. who might not have even participated in the debate.

hi renu,
golden words...im silent...i dont know much abt advaita/visistadvaita...im a silent reader....lol

 

[renuka]

Show me one person who has ultimately worn the crown, please, through faith and faith alone!

Dear Sangom ji,

How can I show you who wore the crown when I am a mere mortal?

That is one question only God can answer.

I have no access to God's data base on who has worn the crown.

I do not want to give examples from scriptures by naming Bhakhtas of yesteryugas..but knowledge and practical application is different.

I have seen many people in my life who do not really read anything on religion but speak words full of wisdom that actually sound very upanishadic.

Faith can open up the portal of knowledge internally and these people acquire knowledge by revelation from God.

So in other words ..what others spend year of mugging up and memorizing mantras and shlokas etc..some people with intense faith actually get downloaded with spiritual knowledge direct from the website of God.

The highest form of knowledge is most of the while a revelation.

 

[renuka]

Dear Sangom ji,

I went to sleep last night thinking of what you wrote about the whole Vishnu- Shiva churning of the sea episode.

I was wondering..if you felt that Shiva was a better divinity than Vishnu doesn't that contradict Advaita itself?

How can we praise Shiva alone and find fault with Vishnu or vice versa..it's like liking only our right eye and disliking our left eye when we actually need both for binocular vision.

 

[sangom]

Dear Sangom ji,

How can I show you who wore the crown when I am a mere mortal?

That is one question only God can answer.

I have no access to God's data base on who has worn the crown.

I do not want to give examples from scriptures by naming Bhakhtas of yesteryugas..but knowledge and practical application is different.

I have seen many people in my life who do not really read anything on religion but speak words full of wisdom that actually sound very upanishadic.

Faith can open up the portal of knowledge internally and these people acquire knowledge by revelation from God.

So in other words ..what others spend year of mugging up and memorizing mantras and shlokas etc..some people with intense faith actually get downloaded with spiritual knowledge direct from the website of God.

The highest form of knowledge is most of the while a revelation.

Smt. Renukaji,

If you say "How can I show you who wore the crown when I am a mere mortal? That is one question only God can answer. I have no access to God's data base on who has worn the crown." it means that what you said earlier is speculation — to the effect that those who have faith are the ultimate winners. I don't know what kind or type of winning you are referring to, but AFA we human mortals are concerned everything ends with death; also, what, if anything, lies beyond death, is beyond human knowledge (at least as of now).

I have also come across some old people who were practically illiterate but had a fund of wisdom in their words. And I think they got it by keen observation of the ways of the world in a somewhat static social surroundings; whether their wisdom would have served a fast-changing society like that of India today, I cannot say. As for spiritual knowledge, I have not come across any example.

Dear Sangom ji,

I went to sleep last night thinking of what you wrote about the whole Vishnu- Shiva churning of the sea episode.

I was wondering..if you felt that Shiva was a better divinity than Vishnu doesn't that contradict Advaita itself?

How can we praise Shiva alone and find fault with Vishnu or vice versa..it's like liking only our right eye and disliking our left eye when we actually need both for binocular vision.

When the thread was started then itself I had cautioned Shri Sravna about the futility of such enquiries and discussions because, in my view, the shaivites & vaishnavites fought bitterly over the superiority of their respective gods in a manner very similar to the two illiterate farmers on the way to market fought about one getting a cow and the other creating a tiger by magic which would eat away that cow, etc.

I have only furnished one or two instances from our scriptures which throw light on the various facets of the two deities created by the priesthood and which have become so deep-rooted in the minds of a people who are conditioned into believing anything which the priesthood would pronounce, because of the stringent caste system which has been prevailing for thousands of years. There may be hundreds, if not thousands of similar or different references to shiva and vishnu in our different scriptures and discussing all these will be utterly futile and will serve no useful purpose; so is this thread as well, imho.

I do not think that I have compromised advaita or any other philosophy (FYI, I am not a strict follower of Sankara's advaita also) by my said post. I wrote that if an ordinary person happens to read (and understand) those verses in Vaalmeeki Raamaayana, he is likely to feel that shiva, and not vishnu, acted as the protector of the universe. As for me, my eyes have been given intact by the fact that my past karmas did not warrant any defects in them while the same past Karmas have caused a very unhealthy body. shiva or vishnu do not enter this aspect.

Hope my position is clear now.