6

Is there a consensus between

  • Followers of Vishnu,
  • Followers of Shiva,
  • Followers of Brahma,
  • And adherents of Advaita Vedanta

Concerning the conclusion from the quarrel between Vishu and Brahma and the test proposed by Shiva to decide: Who is the greatest? see Shiva Purana: Vidyeshvara Samhita.

Note: I do not ask for an interpretation from each group or school, but whether a consensus exists.

Ankit Sharma
  • 6,586
  • 6
  • 40
  • 82
Jo Wehler
  • 1,658
  • 11
  • 20
  • No, a consensus doesn't exist. Shaivites say Shiva is supreme and Vaishnavas say Vishnu is supreme. Shaivites say Shiva Purana is the proof and Vaishnavas generally refer to this verse of the Bhagavad Gita. Advaitins say Atman = Brahman, you are Shiva, you are Vishnu. – Pinakin Dec 22 '15 at 13:03
  • @ChinmaySarupria To be precise, we are not Shiva or Vishnu. When we are free from maya, our Jeevatma will have all powers except creation and destruction. So, we are not Vishnu or Shiva. – The Destroyer Dec 22 '15 at 14:13
  • @AnilKumar I was talking about Advaita point of view. Advaitins say at the highest level there is no difference between you and Shiva. – Pinakin Dec 22 '15 at 14:16
  • @ChinmaySarupria Even i was talking about advaita point of view. See this answer. We can never be exactly equal to Shiva whatever school of thought we consider. We are just Jeeva Shakti of Shiva. – The Destroyer Dec 22 '15 at 14:22
  • @AnilKumar See Sai's answer to the question you linked. – Pinakin Dec 22 '15 at 14:30
  • @ChinmaySarupria Yeah. i saw it. Even he says not to take literal meaning which is more or less same. – The Destroyer Dec 22 '15 at 14:44
  • @AnilKumar Sai in his answer stated the philosophy of Advaita which says there is no 'I' or 'We'. All that exists is Brahman. You just said "We are just Jeeva Shakti of Shiva", advaita says even this "we" is illusory. – Pinakin Dec 22 '15 at 14:49
  • @ChinmaySarupria Yeah, if I and We are illusory, how can we say we are Gods? – The Destroyer Dec 22 '15 at 14:53
  • @AnilKumar When did I say we are gods? – Pinakin Dec 22 '15 at 14:55
  • @ChinmaySarupria "Advaitins say Atman = Brahman, you are Shiva, you are Vishnu". This statement means we are Gods. – The Destroyer Dec 22 '15 at 15:10
  • @AnilKumar By "you", I mean the Atman. – Pinakin Dec 22 '15 at 15:16
  • @ChinmaySarupria ok. i'm not so clear with it. **ānandaṁ paramātmānam ātma-sthaṁ [SB - 11.26.1]
    • Paramatma is the reservoir of all pleasure situated within the soul of every living being.** So, i think there's subtle difference between Atman and Paramatman or Brahman.
     – The Destroyer Dec 22 '15 at 15:32
  • I doubt there will be a consensus, because obviously that is one of the key difference between the schools. :) @ChinmaySarupria Well said! According to Advaita, we are not who we think we are, (Body, Mind, Intellect or Jiva), but Our Reality is God Himself. Advaita Vedanta consists in removing our false identity as a separate Jiva and attaining God-consciousness or Unity with Brahman. Also this Self-realization has nothing to do with powers of creation, preservation or destruction, which only exist when there are two. When there is only one, where is the question of shristi? Thanks – Sai Dec 22 '15 at 16:37
  • 1
    @AnilKumar You may think that there is a subtle difference between Atma and Brahman, and I agree with you. (I follow Ramanujacharya's philosophy of Visistadvaita, which says that Paramatma is the Antaryami or inner self of your Atma.) But Adi Shankaracharya's philosophy of Advaita says there is no difference at all between Atma and Brahman. – Keshav Srinivasan Dec 22 '15 at 16:41
  • 1
    @AnilKumar You are right that we cannot call ourselves God in the literal sense. Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva are usually called Saguna Brahman or Ishvara. Ishvara is like the Ocean. We are like waves. One cannot equate the waves with the Ocean. The waves are always separate and exist as a part of the Ocean. The waves are depended on the ocean for their existence, and the ocean itself contains the waves. However Advaita is different. It says that both the ocean and its waves are 'Water'. Brahman i.e. We are all Brahman. Ayam Atma Brahman. Soham. All the best. – Sai Dec 22 '15 at 16:42
  • 2
    @AnilKumar The difference is what you mean by God. If by God you mean Ishvara, the God with form, the One who has Infinite attributes, and the God of all, then to say that I am God implies duality. Because attributes are a quality of ignorance. You say 'He is beautiful and Powerful' because you are aware of those that are not beautiful and not powerful. All attributes are result of Maya (advaita). However if by God one is talking about the attributeless, qualityless, absolute divine principle of Satchidananda, then to say I am God implies non-duality. I believe all paths as true. All the best. – Sai Dec 22 '15 at 16:46
  • @AnilKumar According to Advaita, it is only due to Maya that you have notions of being the Jiva Shakti of Brahman and all that. Advaitins believe that once all Avidya is gone, it becomes clear that the only think that exists is Brahman, and that the whole notion of gods, Jivas, etc. was illusory. – Keshav Srinivasan Dec 22 '15 at 16:46
  • @jowehler To answer your question, there is a consensus among Hindus of all stripes about what the Shiva Purana is saying. But there is not a consensus over whether the Shiva Purana's version of the story is what actually happened: http://hinduism.stackexchange.com/a/267/36 – Keshav Srinivasan Dec 22 '15 at 16:49
  • First, there are no followers of Brahma as there are for Vishnu and Shiva. Second, you question might as well be aimed at any of the branches of the Abrahamic religions as well asking if they can reach a consensus as to which is better. Different Monotheistic schools of any religious persuasion will never reach agreement. Many dualistic Vashnavites do not even recognize the Shiva Purana. Many dualistic Shavites do not even recognize the Vishnu Purana. There are many answers mostly personal opinions, as such voting to close. – Swami Vishwananda Dec 23 '15 at 08:10
  • @Swami Vishwananda - Vishnu Purana is quoted maximum number of times by Adi Shankara in most of his bhasyas whom most of advaitins and many modern Shaivates and Shaktes consider as their principle acharya. So, dualistic Shaivas not accepting Vishnu purana is proved to be wrong because by doing so they are going against or contesting their own acharya, i.e. Adi Shankara...Anyway these kind of questions do generate unnecerrary rukcus and such questions have already been raised on this forum and also been answered multiple times. So, totally agree with you to vote to close such questions. –  Dec 23 '15 at 15:09
  • Let us continue this discussion in chat. –  Dec 24 '15 at 10:28
  • @Swami Vishwananda In my opinion neither the question is opinion-based nor do I ask for an opinion based answer. Instead I ask about a fact: Does there exist a consensus or not? - The first comment by Chinmay Sarupria understands the question exactly in this sense. And several of the following comments illustrate Chinmay's answer. - Hence I vote for reopen. – Jo Wehler Dec 24 '15 at 16:56
  • @JoWehler The problem is that the trimurti Godhead referenced in the vedas is - as pointed out on my comment on PhilosophySE - aspects of Iswara, or Saguna Brahman. At a later period Vishnu and Shiva became names for the Supreme Personality of Godhead and separate monotheistic traditions. Monotheistic dualist Vashnavites see Vishnu as the Supreme Personality. Monotheistic Shavites see Shiva as the Supreme Personality. All monotheistic dualistic traditions have this problem. – Swami Vishwananda Dec 25 '15 at 05:58
  • 1
    @JoWehler It is like asking certain Christians and certain Muslims if they worship the same God - which they will say no. Fanaticism is its own religion. There is a good book you should read, "Myths and Symbols in Indian Art and Civilization" by Heinrich Zimmer, edited by Joseph Campbell. btw, Sruti (vedic text, revealed by God) is considered primary. Smriti (inference by man) and Puranas are secondary. When there is a conflict between Sruti and the others, Sruti always takes precedence. There is no conflict in veda between Siva and Vishnu as they are the same Saguna Brahman. – Swami Vishwananda Dec 25 '15 at 06:06
  • @JoWehler You can change title of question to "Does consensus exist among Hindus?" or something closer it. I like Shiva more but i prefer advaita more. There's no consensus among Hindus. I voted to open your question seeing your "note". Else, i prefer to close it as opinion based question. – The Destroyer Dec 29 '15 at 15:05
  • The question is framed in such a manner that there is no answer. It is asking for a consensus among devotees, and Sruti is the final authority, not consensus among devotees. Any answer of consensus is opinion based as such and does not meet the guidelines for a question. – Swami Vishwananda Dec 29 '15 at 16:40
  • @SwamiVishwananda Additionally, sectarian worship came about in recent times (with the advent of ramanuja, basava etc.). As such it is not a good indicator of consensus. From time immemorial and until such sectarianism took deep root, hinduism worshipped one supreme who took different forms in different yugas and became that yuga's archavatara. –  Dec 29 '15 at 16:46
  • It clearly shows the falsehood being propagated. Ramanuja was never sectarian. He brought out the essential real tattvas hidden in the Vedas. Some ignorumuses who call Ramanuja as sectarian are completely oblivious to the fact they themselves falsely claim that Shankara established Shanamata ( 6 deities for worship, which would tantamount to sectarian worship only. Though Shankara, never established Shanamata) Adi Shankara was a Vaishnava in the essence that he always accepted the supremacy of Vishnu only. In fact, deity worship is their from Vedic times –  Dec 29 '15 at 17:31
  • @Chinmay Sarupria If you convert your first comment into an answer, I would like to accept your answer. It seems to me, that the whole discussion triggered by your comment illustrates that your are right. – Jo Wehler Dec 30 '15 at 01:22
  • @krishna ? where did you see this? Please give references. First I have heard this. – Swami Vishwananda Dec 30 '15 at 13:31
  • @krishna Sankara authored the Saundaryalahari, a beautiful tribute to Sakti as the Divine Mother. He is known as the Sanmata-sthapaka, establisher of the six cults. He also wrote hymns in praise of Siva, Vishnu, etc. – Swami Vishwananda Dec 30 '15 at 14:24
  • @Swami Vishwananda - Authorship of Soundarya lahari is highly disputable because if you read Adi Shankara's bhasyas and such hymns, it is very clear it is completely against his philosophy, itself. He never established the Shanmatha though the popular notion seems to be. There is no way or disprove that he has written Soundarya lahari or established Shanmatha. Same is the case with Kanakadhara stotram or Lakshmi Narasimha karavalambam etc which are Vishnu and lakshmi. –  Dec 30 '15 at 14:49
  • @Swami Vishwananda - Most of the hymns are mostly written by latter day shankaracharyas and even some unknown authors and passed of as works of Adi Shankara to gain popularity. Popularity is not the yard stick to measure that it is written by Adi Shankara or he established Shanmatha. If Shanmatha is assumed to be established by him, then he is restricting himself to highly sectarian levels contrary to his views in Brahma sutra bhasyas and other bhasyas. –  Dec 30 '15 at 14:58
  • @Krishna source? – Swami Vishwananda Dec 30 '15 at 14:59
  • @Swami Vishwananda - Also, Ganesha, Skandha were not even Vedic Gods of any prominence. Secondly, the moment Shiva and Partially Shakti is considered, Ganapathy and Skandha are already included as deities belonging to Shaivam and partly Shaktam. So, there is no need for separate Gaanapathyam, Skanda as separate deities. These are really sectarian arrangements made by latter day followers of Shankara and Shaivaadvaita followers like Vidyaranya, Appaya deekshita and others. –  Dec 30 '15 at 15:02
  • @Swami Vishwananda - What is source for saying he established Shanmatha or wrote Soundarya Lahari? Don't give me the Vidyaranya commentary on Panchadasi etc..Everyone knows who Vidyaranya is, who was Shivaadvaitin, who was Hard core Shaivate. Does any of the genuine followers like Anadagiri, Sureshvara, Madhusudhana saraswati, Narayana Bhattadhri of Shankara even ever made an attempt to write a commentary on Soundaryalahari or do they say Shankara established Shanmatha? –  Dec 30 '15 at 15:11
  • @Swami Vishwananda - In fact, Narayana bhattadhri clearly says in Narayaneeyam that Adi Shankara only established the supremacy of Vishnu and Worshipped Vishnu alone. Please read it as you seem to belong to RK mutt and they have published Narayaneeyam –  Dec 30 '15 at 15:12
  • Let us continue this discussion in chat. –  Dec 30 '15 at 15:12

2 Answers2

2

The question is framed in such a manner that there is no answer. It is asking for a consensus among devotees, and Sruti is the final authority, not consensus among devotees. Any answer of consensus is opinion based as such and does not meet the guidelines for a question.

In the Pancadasi of Sri Vidyaranya Swami (late 14th century), it says in Chapter VI. (Swami Swahananda translator):

verse 103: The Sruti declares that Isvara is the Lord of Jivas, and also Prakriti. He controls the Gunas too. In the Aranyaka part of the Sruti He is respectfully called the Inner Controller. (Svetasvatara Up. 6.14, Brhadaranyaka Up. 3.7, Katha Up. 2.33...)

verse 104: Here too there are many philsophers who by their arguments maintain different views about Iswara. They quote suitable texts from the Sruti and interpret them according to their light.

verse 106: As person with special nature, Isvara rules the universe. Without His rulership there would be no to regulate bondage and release. (Svetasvatara Up. 6.16-17)

verse 107: The Sruti declares that Nature functions in fear of Isvara. He is the ruler though unattached. The rulership is appropriately vested in Isvara, who is not affected by sufferings, works, and so forth. (Vide Taittiriya Up. 2.8.1, Katha Up. 2.3.3, Nrsimhatapaniya Up. 2...)

verse 114: The Sruti says that the form of Virat is the form of the universe, extending in all directions with an infinite number of heads and eyes. So they meditate on Virat. (Rig Veda 1.10.90, Svetasvatara Up. 3.3) See also Gita 11. Virat is an aspect of Isvara.

verse 115. Then there are worshipers who object to the worship of Virat on the ground that according to this conception of Virat even insects and worms will have to be regarded as Isvara. Sp the four-faced Brahma, the creator, is Isvara and nobody else.

verse 117. The Bhagavatas call Visnu the only Isvara because the lotus-born Brahma issued from the navel of Visnu.

verse 118: The Saivas on the authority of their Agamas declare Siva alone to be Isvara, as according to a tradition in the Puranas, Visnu in spite of all his efforts could not discover the feet of Siva.

verse 119: The followers of the creed of Ganesa say that the elephant-faced Lord is the only Isvara for Siva in order to conquer the demons of the three cities worshiped Ganesa.

verse 120: There are many other sects which try to declare their own favorite deity to be the the Supreme. They quote hymns from the Sruti and alleged traditions in support to their views.

verse 121: So every entity form the Inner Ruler to inert objects is considered Isvara by someone or other, for we find that even the sacred fig tree, the sun-plant and the bamboo etc., are worshiped by the people as family deities.

verse 122: Those who are desirous of ascertaining the real truth study the Sruti and logic. Their conclusion is the same, that Isvara is one only, and this fact we have set forth in this chapter.

verse 124: The correct definition of Isvara is available from the Sruti text. Then there will be no clash with even the worshipers of trees and so forth as Isvara. (By this definition all views have been recognised and fitted in a scheme and they are shown to be in accord with the Vedic teachings.)

As can be seen from the above, there has been no consensus among some of the followers of the various names of the Lord. But for those that study Sruti, there is a consensus. And what does Sruti say? Sruti says:

Rig Veda 1.164.46 - Ekam Sat Vipra Bahudha Vadanti, Truth is One, Men call It by various names.

Kaivalya Upanishad verse 8 (Swami Madhavananda translator):

He is Brahma, He is Shiva, He is Indra, He is the Immutable, the Supreme, the Self-luminious, He alone is Vishnu, He is Prana, He is Time and Fire, He is the Moon.

Niralamba Upanishad verses 6-20 (K. Narayanasvami Aiyar translator):

Who is the creator (Brahma)?

Who is the preserver (Visnu)?

Who is the destroyer (Rudra)?

Who is Indra?

Who is the god of death (Yama)?

Who is the sun (Surya)?

Who is the moon (Candra)?

Who is the gods (Devas)?

Who are the demons (Asuras)?

Who are the evil spirits (Pisacas)?

Who are the men?

Who are the women?

What are beasts, (pasus) etc.?

What are the fixed ones (sthavaras)?

Who are Brahmanas and others?

That Brahman is Brahma, Visnu, Rudra and Indra, Yama, Surya and Candra, Devas, Asuras, Pisacas, men, women, beasts, etc., sthavaras, Brahmanas and others. Here is there is no manyness in the least degree: All this is verily Brahman.

Community
  • 1
Swami Vishwananda
  • 24,140
  • 2
  • 34
  • 78
  • Why do you write: "The question is framed in such a manner that there is no answer. It is asking for a consensus among devotees,..." - The simple answer to the question is "no, there is no consensus". – Jo Wehler May 01 '19 at 07:47
1

My question

Is there a consensus between devotees of different deities and the followers of Advaita Vedanta concerning the question Who is the supreme deity?

has found a clear answer:

There is no consensus.

Thank you all for your comments, explanations and answers.

Jo Wehler
  • 1,658
  • 11
  • 20
  • 1
    There is an old story that Siva, who is the guru of Vishnu, and Vishnu, who is the guru of Siva, had a quarrel. The two made peace with each other, but the followers of Siva and the followers of Vishnu never made peace and continue to quarrel to this day. – Swami Vishwananda Dec 31 '15 at 09:55