Why doesn't Shiva worship anybody where as Vishnu worships him in all his incarnations?
Bhagwata Purana states that Vishnu is more supreme than Shiva, and from Vishnu, Brahma and by Brahma, Shiva was born. But if that is so, why does Vishnu worship Shiva in all of his incarnations, whereas Shiva never worships anybody?
Shiva Purana says that Vishnu and Brahma were created from
Aadi Anant JyotirStambhaof Shiva. When there was a dispute between Brahma and Vishnu about who is more supreme, at that time, Shiva appeared as Jyotirstambha and asked both of them to reach start and end of it. Vishnu traveled downwards to reach end and Brahma traveled upwards to reach beginning, but both of them failed and considered there is no end of Shiva and asked Shiva to guide them. In this story Brahma lied that he reached beginning, So Shiva banned his worships in Hinduism, which is true. Brahma's son Daksha Prajapati was against Shiva because of this reason only.
Now, Lord Rama established Shiva Linga when he was marching towards Lanka which is known as
Rameshwara Mahadevameaning Ishwar (God) of Rama. In Ramayana, when Lord Rama wanted to do Prashchatap because he considered killing Ravana as sin of killing a brahmana, he asked Hanumanji to organize to establish a Shiva Linga and asked again Shiva for mercy and to cut his sin. If Lord is himself able to cut sins, can't he cut his own sins?
In Krishna avatar when Krishna wanted to bring some tree
Kalpa Vrikshafrom Indra, he worshiped Shiva for blessings and that is known as
Gopeshwara Mahadevain vrindavana meaning Ishwara (God) of Gopal (Krishna). Also when Krishna wanted to have a son, he asked sages and from their advice he prayed to Lord Shiva to get a son. If Krishna was Vishnu against who nothing will happen, why he said that "Shive Sarvadhi Sadhike" means nothing happens without Shiva's will, so please bless me with son!! when the Mahabharata was about to be battled he asked Pandavas to have bliss of Shiva first and arranged a Pooja of Shiva Linga.
In Bhagwata Purana also, there is a story about Lakshmi Devi's unhappiness with Vishnu because Vishnu told her that half area of his heart is dedicated to Lord Shiva only. And in the rest of the half, all the creatures of world and all deities including her wife Lakshmi lives!
Parashurama is also considered as great devotee of Shiva, Shiva gave him Parashu (axe), for which Parashurama is famous for.
So, why doesn't Shiva worship anybody whereas Vishnu worships him in all his incarnations?
What I think is, because Shiva is the only Supreme Paramatma as he is unborn (Ajanma), Akarta and Abhokta (Vairagi) as said in Geeta that God is Ajanma, Akarta and Abhokta. God is neerakar (shapeless and formless), Shiva Linga is symbol of Shiva's such form only.
And also Vishnu always advised other deities (Kartikeya, Indra, Parvati, etc.) to worship Shiva only if they have mistakenly committed sins.
I'm curious and trying to make sense of all this. Can anybody throw some light on my doubts?
Vishnu says Shiva is the eternal origin (seed) of all things
From Veda Vyasa's Mahabharata, Anushasana Parva:
The blessed Vishnu said, 'I saluted Mahadeva, saying,--Salutations to thee, O thou that art the eternal origin of all things. The Rishis say that thou art the Lord of the Vedas. The righteous say that thou art Penance, thou art Sattwa, thou art Rajas, thou art Tamas, and thou art Truth...
Vishnu himself said "Shiva is the eternal origin of ..." That's why I think Shiva linga is the seed and whatever we see, it is just a tree from that seed.
The point B in the question confuse me. It says that Vishnu and Brahma were created from JyotirStambha. But after that it is mentioned that there was a dispute between Vishnu and Brahma and only after that JyotirStambha appeared. Then how can both of them created from JyotirStambha?
May be it is in `Scandha Purana`. But I have heard this story some where. If I will find online link of this story, I will cite it in the question.
thank you all for +1s, I also want to share that Vishnu has told Parvati devi that `"HariHara can never be separated. I live in Shiva only. And anybody who disrespects Shiva, I will punish him always."`. I have seen this story in Devon ke Dev Mahadeva... No idea about it is truth or just television invention.
@A_runningMind Read here about Lord Vishnu and Lakshmi's fight about keeping only Lakshmi in his half heart.. This may be taken from some hindu scripture.. no idea about its truthfulness but I hope in some scripture this story may be mentioned....
@ParthTrivedi: Got the point you trying to convey that Siva and Vishnu can never be separated, but I was confused by your second point in the question, i.e. Vishnu and Brahma were created from Jyotirstambha.
There is a story that Vishnu and Brahma were created from Jyotirstambha. Give me some time, I will cite it from where I have read it, Currently my book "Shiva Purana" is at my cousine's home, once I get it, I will read it thoroughly and again I will cite it here in comment. And if I will find it on internet, I will provide you a link, where you can read them.
Hanuman is the incarnation of Shiv. And Hanuman is the great devotee of Lord Rama (Vishnu).
God is one. The wise of the wise Love all beings as manifestations of their Ishta Deva and respect other people's views. :) Suppose Shiva is the source of all beings. From His jyothirsthamba came Vishnu and Brahma. That which comes from you is made of the same essence as you. Suppose Vishnu is the source of all and Brahma and Shiva came from Him. Divinity gives rise to Divinity. It is the same divinity, only the form & function is different! Example: Actor X plays three roles in three movies 1, 2 and 3. The three roles are different, but played by the same actor! Actor - GOD
@Sai The question is about truthfulness based on the behavior of Vishnu and Shiva. We need to think logically based on the data we have. You are right but this is not point. My point is "See the data we have, only one of them is true,now what we think which should be true based on the deity's behavior? Roles are okey but roles are also not same nor equal." If shiva is given the role to give boon to Lord Rama then that aslo states that shiva's role is of giver so higher than Rama or Vishnu. Isn't it?
"truthfulness based on the behavior of Vishnu and Shiva". That doesn't make much sense. Are you asking "Who is superior? Vishnu or Shiva?" or are you asking something else. My comment was assuming the former.
Krishna never said he is Supreme, when he shown Vishwaroopa to Arjuna, Arjuna asks Vishwaroopa who are you? and answer was "I'm Kaal" he never said im Krishna or Vishnu, so one must understand that there is something beyond Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva, that is Adi and beyond Adi, it is Omkar (Big bang).
If we try to remember Ramayana, in that it is mentioned that Hanuman was incarnation of Shiva and Yes, obviously he was the greatest devotee of Lord Rama(Incarnation of Vishnu).
This is wrong - _From Vishnu, Brahma and By Brahma , Shiva was born_. Bhagvatam doesn't mention this. Bhagvatam mentions Rudra, and not Shiva (world of difference between them). As per Bhagvatam, Shiva is the closest to Supreme Lord Krishna and is not a position, while Brahma is a replaceable position. So logically, one particular Brahma in every Kalpa cannot produce the eternal Shiva. It's only one Rudra.
Shiva is reputed to constantly meditate upon Sri Rama.
Really @Mr.P , you trust those LifeOk, star plus and movies Tv serials to tell you about God. They are the purest form of liars. Earlier almost all different Gods were shown in Serials. Then they found that Krishna was becoming more famous and almost all serials became Krishna centered. Then during time of Colors Naagin they saw people shifting to Shiva, so all serials bent to Shiva. Then during Salman khans Bajrangi Bhaijaan, all serials clustered around Hanumaan, but eventually it also faded away. Now Colors Mahakali is gaining popularity and all shows center at Kali and Devi's form.
Do not go with Serials, they at times even deviate completely from true story. They show What people want to see, not what is true.
Though the god is one, when we see in terms of Generation, Operation, Destruction these are taken care by Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva respectively. Since Vishnu is responsible for execution, it is He who descends to take care of the creation. This may be killing the demons or establishing dharma or to spread knowledge or to fulfill desire of a devotee. No one can understand Him, so He shows how to worship Him for different purposes. Also Vishnu worships Shiva symbolically to say both are same.
‘Sivasya hridayam vishnur-vishnoscha hridayam sivah’ — Vishnu is the heart of Shiva and likewise Shiva is the heart of Vishnu."
They both meditate upon one another all the time! A good discussion on this is here
In other perspective Vishnu has taken Rajas nature and Shiva has taken Sattva. Rajas is full of desires and action and hence He worships Shiva to fulfill the desires, this way He shows how to worship the god whereas Shiva is satvik, He is self realized and self sufficient and hence He doesn't appear to worship anyone externally.
**hence He doesn't appear to worship anyone externally.** What do you mean by externally? Is there diff between internally and externally in devotion? Shiva use to worship Narayana (specially Rama) in his tapas. He meditate upon Rama in his tapasya. And also, Shiva is considered as Biggest Devotee of Narayana.
And in every incarnation of Narayana, Shiva himself comes to do vandanaa of incarnation of Vishnu. And this vandanaa is same as puja which is use to do by Rama and Krishna towards Shiva. So both worship each other internally as well as externally. Besides internal and external doesn't matter in devotion at all.
Brahma - Rajas (Creation). Shiva - Tamas (Destruction). Vishnu - Satvik (Protect creation from destruction).
@pbvamsi ‘Sivasya hridayam vishnur-vishnoscha hridayam sivah’ - what is the source for this verse?
Puranas are sectarian literature. You will find them disagreeing about the supreme Deity. You should instead read a non-sectarian scripture like Mahabharata.
The Supreme Spirit has three conditions. In the form of Brahma, he is the Creator, and in the form of Vishnu he is the Preserver, and in his form as Rudra, he is the Destroyer of the Universe!
Brahma, Vishnu and Rudra/Shiva are simply three names and forms of Brahman.
Rishi Sanat-sujata says in Mahabharata Udyoga Parva Section 43:
There is but one Brahman which is Truth’s self. It is from ignorance of that One, that god-heads have been conceived to be diverse.
Sri Hari himself said that no one should see any difference between Him and Shiva.
Well-adored by the Rishis, by Brahma, and by all the deities, that great God, the Lord of the universe, otherwise called by the name of Hari, then addressed the illustrious Isana and said these words:-He that knows thee, knows me. He that follows thee, follows me. There is no difference between thee and me. Do thou never think otherwise.
Another example is given below:
Then Partha, with a cheerful soul, and joined hands and eyes expanded (in wonder), gazed at the god having the bull for his mark [Shiva] and who was the receptacle of every energy. And he beheld the offerings he made every night to Vasudeva lying by the side of the Three-eyed deity.
I am adding a passage that clearly states that only ignorant person sees any difference between Brahman, Brahma, Rudra and Hari.
Sri Bhagavan said: I, who am known as the supreme cause of the worlds, its soul, its ruler, the witness of everything, the self-effulgent being and attributeless Absolute - in truth I am both Brahma and Rudra. O Learned one! Verily I assume different names like Brahma, Vishnu and Maheswara, appropriate for the creation, preservation and destruction of the universe, which I perform by assuming My Yoga-maya, which has its three constituent Gunas of Sattva, Rajas and Tamas. In Me, the all-comprehending and all-pervading Self, known as Brahman, the ignorant man sees Brahma, Rudra and other entities as different. Just as a man will not consider the members of his body like the head and the limbs as different from himself but only parts of himself, so does one who has taken refuge in Me sees all beings as parts of Me. He attains eternal peace who does not perceive any difference between the three - Brahma, Vishnu and Maheswara - who are one in nature and pervade in all beings.
Srimad Bhagavata Purana translated by Swami Tapasyananda IV.7.50-54.
You are totally correct shiva is one nature of bramha(supreme god nirakar) and Vishnu is another nature of bramha it is on the worshipper to take/make a Ishta Devta(according to his liking of the supreme nature), to attain salvation/
@OmShankar Krishna never said in Gita stating the word "Krishna/Vishnu" is supreme.
@ChinmaySarupria Well, for example Krishna says in Gita verse 7.19 "vāsudevaḥ sarvam iti". Of course, different people interpret the Gita differently.
@ChinmaySarupria, yes, but he says - **I am Supreme, I am the cause of all causes, Everything originates from me, There is nothing beyond me** - and much more such statements in Bhagvad Gita. What about those?
@PradipGangopadhyay, _It is from ignorance of that One (Brahman), that god-heads have been conceived to be diverse_ - OK. But **whose ignorance**? Brahman's? Brahman is supposed to be with Full knowledge, so from were does the ignorance come? Is Brahman influenced by things like ignorance outside of it? That questions Brahman's superiority.
@ChinmaySarupria, correct. So neither is Absolute version, everything is relative. Are you saying and abiding by that? I am fine with that :)
@OmShankar, I suspect that it is the ignorance of the spiritual aspirant which has led to the conception of the diverse god-heads. The quote is not talking about Brahman's ignorance.
@PradipGangopadhyay, the vedic philosophy does not work as per your assumptions. `It is from ignorance of that One (Brahman)` - is clearly mentioned. It is not said about the spiritual aspirant in the Sloka -- So either the Brahman/Advaita followers should give a solid example **OR** not give any vedic examples when they have to back of when questioned!
So is it your claim that the Vedic philosophy says that Brahman is ignorant?
Please read the Mahabharata carefully. Also, the puranas Srimad bhagavatham, Varaha Purana, Padma purana, Garuda Purana, Matsya Purana etc....In all these puranas there upmteen number of instances where Shiva Worshipped Vishnu or Krishna or Rama as the Supreme Lord.
Mahabharata clearly says
mahAdevaH sarvamedhe mahAtmA hutvA AtmAnaM devadevo babhUva
This clearly indicates that Rudra Performed Sarvamedha yagna and prayed to Lord Vishnu to become Mahadeva.
In the Mahabharata sAnti parva, Arjuna asks Krishna the following:
While felling the enemies with arrows in the battlefield, I find a Person standing ahead of me. He is brilliant like Agni, with a Trisula in the hand. In whichever direction he goes, my enemies in that direction are burnt and killed by him. I follow him and attack the same persons, who have already been attacked by him. Onlookers are unaware of this truth and think that my enemies have indeed been attacked and felled by me.
To this, Krishna replies,
Under my protection, you have won a great victory in Battle. Know, O Son of Kunti, that he whom you saw going before you in battle was none other than Rudra also known as Devadeva and Kapardin. They say he is Kala (time or reckoner of death for souls), Born of my Wrath. Those foes you have slain were, in fact slain by him. Hence adore with a controlled mind, that Umapati, Devadeva, of immeasurable greatness, Maheswara, the Changeless (in yoga).
Note the bolded words, “Born of my Wrath”. This shows again, as in many, many quotes, that Siva was born of nArAyaNa. Now, in all honesty, no one will deny the greatness Krishna ascribes to Siva. He is changeless in yoga, he is a great deva, etc.
But, it confirmed with the above stements that Rudra/Shiva's was born out of Vishnu's wrath. Please check the Santi parva of the Mahabharata for these quotes.
Brahma-Rudra dialogue in the Shanti Parva of the Mahabharata
And again, in the Shanti Parva, we have the following incident where Brahma declares Siva is his son, and Siva again addressed Brahma as his father:
atrApy udAharantImam itihAsaM purAtanam
brahmaNA saha saMvAdaM tryambakasya vizAM pate
“In this connection is cited the old narrative of the discourse between Brahma, O king, and the Three-eyed Mahadeva.”
(skipping a few verses that describe the Ocean of Milk and the mountain on which Brahma resides)
atha tatrAsatas tasya caturvaktrasya dhImataH
lalATaprabhavaH putraH ziva AgAd yadRcchayA
AkAzenaiva yogIzaH purA trinayanaH prabhuH
“While the four-faced Brahma of great intelligence was seated there, his son Siva, who had sprung from his forehead encountered him one day in course of his wanderings through the universe. In days of yore, the Three-eyed Siva endued with puissance and high Yoga, while proceeding along the sky, beheld Brahma seated on that mountain”
tataH khAn nipapAtAzu dharaNIdharamUrdhani
agrataz cAbhavat prIto vavande cApi pAdayoH
“Therefore, he (Siva) dropped down quickly on its top. With a cheerful heart he presented himself (to Brahma) and worshipped at his (Brahma’s) feet.”
taM pAdayor nipatitaM dRSTvA savyena pANinA
utthApayAmAsa tadA prabhur ekaH prajApatiH
“Beholding Mahadeva prostrated at his feet, Brahma took him up with his hand. Brahma, that puissant and one Lord of all creatures thus raised Mahadeva up, ”
uvAca cainaM bhagavAMz cirasyAgatam Atmajam
svAgataM te mahAbAho diSTyA prApto 'si me 'ntikam
kaccit te kuzalaM putra svAdhyAyatapasoH sadA
nityam ugratapAs tvaM hi tataH pRcchAmi te punaH
“The Grandsire said, 'Welcome art thou, O thou of mighty arms. By good luck I see thee after such a long time come to my presence. I hope, O son, that everything is right with thy penances and thy Vedic studies and recitations. Thou art always observant of the austerest penances. Hence I ask thee about the progress and well-being of those penances of thine!”
Then, Rudra replies as follows:
tvatprasAdena bhagavan svAdhyAyatapasor mama
kuzalaM cAvyayaM caiva sarvasya jagatas tathA
Rudra said, 'O illustrious one, through thy grace, all is well with my penances and Vedic studies. It is all right, again, with the universe.
(Then Brahma explains to Rudra the meaning of ‘Purusha’. We find here two invaluable shlokas that show the supremacy of Sriman Narayana):
brahmovAca zRNu putra yathA hy eSa puruSaH zAzvato 'vyayaH akSayaz cAprameyaz ca sarvagaz ca nirucyate na sa zakyas tvayA draSTuM mayAnyair vApi sattama saguNo nirguNo vizvo jJAnadRzyo hy asau smRtaH azarIraH zarIreSu sarveSu nivasaty asau vasann api zarIreSu na sa lipyati karmabhiH mamAntarAtmA tava ca ye cAnye dehasaMjJitAH sarveSAM sAkSibhUto 'sau na grAhyaH kena cit kva cit
Listen, O son, as to how that Purusha is indicated. He is eternal and immutable. He is undeteriorating and immeasurable. He pervades all things. O best of all creatures, that Purusha cannot be seen by thee, or me, or others. Those that are endued with the understanding and the senses but destitute of self-restraint and tranquility of soul cannot obtain a sight of him.
The Supreme Purusha is said to be one that can be seen with the aid of knowledge alone. Though divested of body, He dwells in every body. Though dwelling, again, in bodies, He is never touched by the acts accomplished by those bodies. He is my Antaratma (inner soul). He is thy inner soul. He is the all-seeing Witness dwelling within all embodied creatures and engaged in marking their acts. No one can grasp or comprehend him at any time.
The last two lines have been quoted by Sri Adi Shankara in Brahma Sutra Bhashya (2.1.1) showing that this section.
Rudra does not act without the approval of nArAyaNa, the supreme
After this, Brahma declares to Rudra who exactly this Purusha is:
tatra yaH paramAtmA hi sa nityaM nirguNaH smRtaH
sa hi nArAyaNo jJeyaH sarvAtmA puruSo hi saH
'The truth is that He who is the Supreme Soul is always devoid of Rajas and Tamas (nirguNa). He is nArAyaNa. He is the universal soul, and he is the one Purusha.'
The mahAbHArata contains the story of how 5 Indras were cursed by Shiva to be born as the 5 pAndavas. Shiva then, takes these Indras to nArAyaNa and asks approval for his actions as follows:
“Accompanied by all those Indras, the god Isana then went unto Narayana of immeasurable energy, the Infinite, the Immaterial, the Uncreate, the Old, the Eternal, and the Spirit of these universes without limits. Narayana approved of everything. Those Indras then were born in the world of men. And Hari (Narayana) took up two hairs from his body, one of which hairs was black and the other white. And those two hairs entered the wombs of two of the Yadu race, by name Devaki and Rohini.”
Note how nArAyaNa is described here as the supreme in relation to Rudra and Indra, whereas Isana (Rudra) does not enjoy such adjectives.
The link for that incident is here. Readers can check the Sanskrit verses: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m01/m01200.htm
the mahAbhArata says that Siva came to BadarikAshramam and was engaged in a fierce fight with nara-nArAyaNa, which culminated in nArAyaNa strangling Rudra’s throat till it became black. Then, Brahma appeared and chastised Siva and told him to worship the sages Nara-nArAyaNa, who were avatArAs of the supreme brahman, Lord nArAyaNa.
The vAlmiki rAmAyaNa does not contain a single instance of rAmA worshipping shiva. Rather, the following two statements are found:
HanumAn tells rAvana thus:
brahmaa vaa svayambhuuH chaturaananaH rudraa vaa triNetraH tripuraantakaHmahendraH vaa indraH suranaayakah na shaktaaH traatum raamavadhyamyudhi (~sundara khAnda – 51.45)
Neither Brahma the self-existing god with four faces or Rudra with three eyes and the destroyer of Tripura or Mahendra the god of atmosphere and sky as also the lord of celestials would not be able to protect the one to be killed by Rama in battle."
Mahabharata, Shanti Parva (12.328.5 onwards, dialogue between Lord Krishna and Arjuna):
brAhme rAtrikShaye prApte tasya hy amitatejasaH prasAdAtprAdurabhavatpadmaM padmanibhekShaNa tatra brahmA samabhavatsa tasyaiva prasAdajaH
In the brahma muhurta, at the end of the night, due to the mercy of the extremely brilliant Lord, a lotus emerged from His navel and in that lotus, Brahma was born, ofcourse, due to His grace.
ahnaH kShaye lalAtAchcha suto devasya vai tathA krodhAviShTasya sa~njaGYe rudraH saMhAra kArakaH etau dvau vibudhashreShThau prasAdakrodhajau smR^itau
At the end of the day, the Lord [present as antaryAmi of Brahma *] created Rudra out of krodha-guna, to enable him to be the 'samhara-karta'. Thus, these two 'fine-among-wise', Brahma and Rudra, are known to have been born out of grace and anger respectively.
tadAdeshita panthAnau sR^iShTi saMhAra kArakau nimittamAtraM tAvatra sarvaprAni varapradau
Thus, they carry out the instructed tasks of creation and destruction. However, they, the givers of boons to all the creatures, are just the agents.
nArAyaNAtmako GYeyaH pANDaveya yuge yuge
O Arjuna, know that in every yuga, Rudra is 'nArAyaNAtmaka'. (This phrase can mean: one whose indweller is Narayana, one who is always immersed in Narayana.)
tasmin hi pUjyamAne vai devadeve maheshvare sampUjito bhavetpArtha devo nArAyaNaH prabhuH
It is the Lord, the prabhu, the Narayana IN Maheshvara (the worshipable, the lord of the devas), who is actually worshiped.
ahamAtmA hi lokAnAM vishvAnAM pANDunandana tasmAdAtmAnamevAgre rudraM sampUjayAmyaham yadyahaM nArchayeyaM vai IshAnaM varadaM shivam AtmAnaM nArchayetkashchiditi me bhAvitaM manaH
O son of Pandu, I am, indeed, the Atma, the indweller of this universe and the worlds. Therefore, I worship myself first, even when I worship Rudra. If I did not worship Rudra, the bestower of boons, in such a way (i.e., worshiping the indwelling Lord first), some would not worship Me, the indwelling Lord, at all - this is my opinion.
mayA pramANaM hi kR^itaM lokaH samanuvartate pramAnAni hi pUjyAni tatastaM pUjayAmyaham
Whatever I follow and give due worth as a pramaNa, the world follows that. Such pramanas have to be duly followed; therefore I follow them.
yastaM vetti sa mAM vetti yo.anu taM sa hi mAm anu rudro nArAyaNashchaiva sattvamekaM dvidhAkR^itam loke charati kaunteya vyakti sthaM sarvakarmasu
Whoever knows him, knows Me. Whoever follows him, follows Me. (Though) the world, in all its actions, worships two gods, Rudra and Narayana, it is actually one only who is worshiped.
na hi me kenachid deyo varaH pANDavanandana iti sa~ncintya manasA purANaM vishvamIshvaram putrArthaM ArAdhitavAn AtmAnaM aham AtmanA
O Son of Pandu, there is, of course, nobody who can grant Me boons. Knowing that well, I worhip Myself, Who am the beginningless and universal power, known as Sarveshvara, for the sake of getting sons.
na hi viShNuH pranamati kasmai chidvibudhAya tu R^ita AtmAnameveti tato rudraM bhajAmyaham
Indeed Vishnu does not bow to any one and [even when He bows to Himself], for what sake, but for the sake of showing the path to the wise. Therefore, it is the truth that I worship myself even when I worship Rudra.
"With offerings I propitiate the branches of this swift-moving God, the bounteous Visnu. Hence Rudra gained his Rudra-strength: O Asvins, ye sought the house that hath celestial viands." (Rig Veda 7.40.5)
Here is the Banasura episode from Padma Purana - Uttarakhanda chapter 250 (Verses 21 onwards)
(Verse 39 to 45)
Having vanquished the three eyed god, Krishna blew his conch. Bana began to attack Krishna. Krishna employed sudarshana chakra which cut off the multiple arms of Bana.
Parvati the consort of Siva rushed with folded hands and started praying to Krishna as follows: (Verses 46 to 49)
Krishna, Narayana, Ocean of compassion, best of yadus, lord of gods, I (parvati) was your female servant previously and at that time you gave me a boon that I would be having the perpetual companionship of my husband living. All sages declared that I was blessed by you by taking one principle name of your thousand names. Govinda, Lord who rides Garuda, therefore please make that boon come true. Please give life to my husband, Siva.
Rudra said: (Verses 50 to 51)
Pleased with the prayer of Parvati, the lotus eyed lord Krishna withdrew the weapon which threw Siva into unconsciousness… Having freed by Krishna from the effects of the weapon, Siva woke up and joined his palms and started praying the Lord of worlds (Krishna)
Following this Siva worships and prays to Lord Vishnu/Krishna (Verses 52 onwards till the end of the chapter 250 of the Padma Purana, Uttara Khanda).
Please refer to the link http://is1.mum.edu/vedicreserve/puranas/padma_purana_6uttara.pdf for original sanskrit text, chapter 250 for more details.
Also, please refer to Bramhavaivarta Purana, Siva and Parvati worship to Lord Vishnu/Krishna to get a son. Lord Vishnu having been pleased by the prayers of Siva and Parvati grants them a boon that a valiant son will be born to them. This son is Ganesha/Vinayaka. Please read the original text for more information.
There are many more such statements from scriptures where Siva and Parvati worshipped Lord Vishnu umpteen number of times. So questions and statements like Shiva never worshipped Vishnu are invalid.
Now, let us look at a few more verses from Padma Purana:
Shiva prays to vishNu thus in the padma purAna:
anyadevaM varaM dehi prasiddhaM sarvajantuShu |
martyo bhUtvA bhavAneva mama sAdhaya keshava ||
mAM bhajasva cha devesha varaM matto gR^ihANa cha |
yenA.ahaM sarvabhUtAnAM pUjyAtpUjyataro.abhavam.h ||
Meaning : "Please give me this boon. By incarnating on Earth, Oh Lord Kesava, worship me and get boons from me. From this, I will become worship-worthy to all the beings.
Lord Vishnu grants this boon to Siva and says that he will make Rudra be known as (bestower of boons) by worshipping Rudra in his avatArAs (in succeeding verses in Padma Purana).
Similarly, the kurma purana and the Varaha Purana also mentions that Siva worshipped Vishnu and got a boon that Lord Vishnu will worship Rudra/Siva. Lord Vishnu grants this boon.
So, it is very clear that siva and parvati both had prayed to vishnu, many times.
Also, I hope this clarifies why Lord Vishnu is the Supreme and not Lord Shiva.
Please don't watch some programs on TV or cartoons or movies and make your mind...Please go through the actual scriptures also and do due diligence before making wild claims.
The following are the conclusions
Shiva always worships Lord Vishnu. Vishnu alone is abode of Sattva guna and Siva is abode of Tamas.
-Matsya Purana (See line 68 in page 216 in the link provided) .
sāttvikeṣu purāṇeṣu māhātmyamadhikaṃ hareḥ /
rājaseṣu ca māhātmyam adhikaṃ brahmaṇo viduḥ // MatsP_53.68 //
tadvadagneśca māhātmyaṃ tāmaseṣu śivasya ca /
Link : is1.mum.edu/vedicreserve/puranas/matsya_purana.pdf
This in turn means that only Vishnu is abode Sattva or All sattvik puranas glorify Lord Vishnu and Siva puranas are Tamasic.
In the Bhanavad Gita, Arjuna himself calls Lord krishna as Vishnu in Vishwaroopa darshana chapter 11 and asks him to show his pleasant Chaturbhuja form..So, when you say that krishna never said he is supreme you are incorrect,
Let us consider the following verse, “brahmanam isam kamalasana-stham” from the vishwaroopa darshana chapter 11 verse 15.
Here are the interpretations of the 3 acharyas from their respective Gita Bhasyas:
Shankaracharya – “I see Brahma, the Lord of all Creatures (Isham), seated on the lotus”.
Ramanujacharya - “I see Brahma and Siva who abides by the directions of the lotus seated Brahma”.
Madhvacharya – “I see Brahma and Siva who is seated in the lap of the lotus seated Brahma”.
So, all the acharyas have clearly indicated all deities are there inside Lord Krishna including Bramha and Siva. Please read carefully, Lord Vishnu is not there or not mentioned to be within the Vishwaroopam form because, Lord Vishnu is Krishna. So, everything and anything abides in Lord Vishnu/Narayana/Krishna. So Lord Vishnu/Narayana/Krishna is the Supreme.
Lets look at a few more verses (this list is not exhaustive. read the BG for more verses)
Chapter 9, verse 11:avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā mānuṣīṁ tanum āśritam paraṁ bhāvam ajānanto mama bhūta-maheśvaram
Clearly Krishna is saying that he is Supreme Lord (Sarva bhuta Maheshwaram) There are many such instances in Bhagavad Gita where Krishna Clearly indicates that he is the supreme.
Chapter 11 Verse 24 : Arjuna pleads with Krishna and addresses him as Vishnu
Chapter 11 Verse 46 : Arjuna is requesting for the pleasant Chaturbhujha form
Chapter 15 Verse 15: Lord Krishna says that he is the one to be known by the Vedas; i.e. the goal of the vedas, not Omkar or Bramha or Siva or any other deity.
Chapter 15 Verse 16,17, 18 – Lord Krishna clearly brings out he is beyond the perishable (Kshara) and imperishable (Akshara - Atma). He clearly brings out that he is the Ultimate Supreme Lord (Purushottama) beyond both Kshara and Akshara.
There are many more verses in the previous chapters where Krishna clearly brings out that he is the ultimate Supreme Goal. He is the Father, grandfather, mother, He is "Aum" in the vedas.
Chapter 9 , Verse 17:
"Pitahamaha sya jagato mata dhata pitamaha ! Vedyam pavitra omkara rik sama yajur eva cha!!
Lord Krishna is saying he is the omkara among the vedas.
So, Lord Krishna/Vishnu is the SUPREME.
Now, to the grand episode of Shiva consuming Halahala for which many shaivas and shaktas, blow their false trumphets (i am just providing only information from Padma Purana. There are many more puranas like Garuda, Brahmanda where it exactly concurs with Padma purana)
In Padma Purana, Uttara Khanda , Section 6; Chapter 232, Shiva says the following regarding the churning of the ocean and halahala or poison episode:
Then at that time when the great ocean was being churned, at first there came up the very strong Kalakuta poison which was very painful, very fierce, and which was like the fire of universal destruction. [Verses 7-10]
Seeing (it), all gods and demons, being frightened,fled away. O you of beautiful eyes, then seeing the best gods frightened and fleeing away, I (Shiva) said to them: "O you all hosts of gods, do not be afraid of the poison. I shall drink this strongpoison, Kalakuta." Thus addressed by me, all the gods, led by Indra and bowing, very much praised me with the words 'Well, Well'. On seeing the strong poison, like a cloud, having come up I (Shiva) meditated in my heart upon the eagle-bannered god Visnu, resembling the rising sun and holding a conch, a disc, and a mace.[Verses 11-15]
Having meditated (i.e. when Shiva meditated) with a concentrated mind upon that lord along with Sri and Bhumi, having earrings of gold purified by fire, remover of all miseries, and on my having muttered the great hymn of the name and form (of Visnu) along with MahalaksmI, all that poison, which was very fierce, which was the first one, which was fearful to all, which was (capable of) destroying all the worlds, was digested (by me i.e Shiva) due to the three names of Visnu, the omnipresent one. He who,being restrained, would devoutly mutter the three names of Visnu, viz. Acyuta, Ananta, Govinda, beginning with Pranava (i.e. Om) and (also) ending with Om, has no fear of death, so also the great fear due to poison, disease and fire. The wise, restrained one, who would mutter the great hymn—the three names—does not have fear of Death; then from where else (can he have it)? Thus with (the muttering of) the three names I (Shiva) drank that poison. [Verses 16-21]
This shatters the myth behind the Halahala episode portraying the greatness of Shiva. Shiva literally prayed and worshipped Lord Vishnu before consuming the poison because of which Shiva was able to control the poison.
Unlike other Puranas, Bhagavad Gita, Ramayana, Vishnu purana, Padma Purana have not been plagiarised or interpolated to extent the other texts are. So how ever hard one can try their best by saying advaitha, nirguna bramhan, Bramha, Siva etc., but the principle outcome is Lord Vishnu/Narayana/Krishna alone is SUPREME, even according to the great Advaitha acharya Adi Shankara himself.
Read Shankara's Gita Bhasya and also for that matter his bhasyas on upanishads for more information.
All Vedas, ithihasa, puranas etc clearly indicate that Vishnu alone is abode of Sattva and Shiva is tamas...Shiva got the name Shiva i.e.auspicious and became great after bearing the Ganga on his head which has its origination in the foot of Lord Vishnu
Vamana episode in Padma Purana, uttara khanda, section 6, Chapter 240,
I (Shiva )held her (Ganga) on my head to purify myself. Having held (ganga on my head) the auspicious water of Ganga for a thousand divine years, I obtained bliss,and am adored in all worlds [Verses 39-48].
Shiva further says :
There is no doubt that he who would carry on his head the water of Ganga rising from Visnu's foot, or would drink it, would be respected by the world...[Verse 49 onwards]
Please read the puranas. Majority of the 18 puranas, ithihasa, Vedas Unequivocally uphold that Vishnu alone is Sattva and Siva is Tamas. This is not to deride anyone. But this is what is given in the scriptures.
All genuine scriptures and genuine acharyas, including Veda Vyasa and Adi Shankara also declare that "Na daivam Keshavatparam" (There is no Lord either superior or equal to Keshava)
If Adi Shankaracharya was a Vaishnava, then why does the Advaita version of the Sankalpam say "Parvati Parameshwara Prityartham", whereas the Vadakalai Sri Vaishnava version says "Sriman Narayana Prityartham"?
@Keshav - They say " Parameshwara preethyartham" only. Now, parameshwara is not Siva only as you know, the word parameshwara is common name and even brahma, Indra etc also have been addressed as Parameshwara at many places. Here, Parameshwara is ultimate supreme lord need not be Shiva. Now, if some one speciafically, adds "Parvati --Parameshwara preethyartham", it is very clear that they are afraid that because they use the word "Parameshwara" they cant support their saiva views. Also, it might be their tradition or localised culture. It doesn't have any basis in Vedas.
@Keshav - Similar arguments on the sankalpa part has taken place, recently in Narayanaastra blog spot too. You can check that too. here is the link http://narayanastra.blogspot.in/p/a-note-to-our-readers.html Check the comments section where this discussion on sankalpa has taken place. Hope it helps
@Keshav - Also, do you or any one of the so called advaitins have any reference or proof that Adi Shankara used "Parvati parameshwara prithyartham..." or that he never used "Narayana prithayartham.." as part of his sankalpams from any of Prasthana traya works or from his upanishad commentaries ?
@Keshav - Also, one question to advaitins who say abheda , nirguna always and then use this kind of tricks, like "Parvati Parameshvara prithyartham" etc. Why show partiality, if they truly believe in abhedam and nirgunatvam? If they are true advaitins then their sankalpa cannot be addressed to Shiva, the parvati pati alone, because Shiva is not Nirguna. These are all tricks by Saivaites masquerading as Advaitins. I dont think true advaitins will do this kind of things.
I'm not an Advaitin, so I have no idea what Sankalpam (if any) Adi Shankaracharya mentioned in his works. By the way, do you know what the origins are of the lines "Sriman Narayana Prithyartham" and "Parameshwara Prithyartham" in the Sankalpams? Are they found in scripture or were they later additions to the Sankalpam ritual? I asked a question here about this line in the Sankalpam: http://hinduism.stackexchange.com/q/3986/36
@Keshav - As far as, i know, Sriman Narayana preetyatham or Parameshwara preetyartham or Bhagvad preethyaryham etc are all fine. Unfortunately, i dont have any valid reference of now.
Yeah, I'm not asking whether they're fine. I'm just asking where they come from? Is the Sankalpam procedure that Hindus follow nowadays even mentioned in any Hindu scripture, or is it just tradition?
@Krishna, which Mahabharata version you are referring to? Also, the Puranas you have mentioned are Vaishnava Puranas - which is less than 1/3 of Puranas. Puranas are imagination and conflict each other. Either they are all true (considering the logic of different time/yugas) or all wrong. Plus, the Brahma Sutras have various Bhashyas and commentaries - Obviously the Vaishnava commentary will be inclined towards Vaishnava philosophy.
@Krishna, your statement about reading puranas and all vedic literature does not hold good. All Vedic literature and Upanishads (specially the 10 Mukhya) are inclined towards non-duality, deity-worship comment, and self realization - Brahman being supreme.
@Krishna, as a side note, Tamas and Sattva both exist - so how do you say that Sattva is Absolute, and Tamas is relative? You are talking Vaishnava inclined stuff alone. Your remark *genuine acharya* and *genuine literature* also does not hold good, as you consider genuine an artifact of your philosophy alone. There are 99+ Nayanars, bonafide saints of Shaivism - they are genuine too. Are you open to literature and preaching from them? This is hypocrisy - considering **genuine** as a heritage of my own philosophy!
@Om Shankar - Please read the mahabharata on sacred texts or any original mahabharata containing english and sanskrit verses. Obviously, Shaiva puranas will be more Shaiva oriented and they too are hardly 1/3 all the puranas. So, please read the scriptures, instead of giving your views. I have given even details. All are available in the texts indicated.
@Om Shankar - you say about 99 + nayanmars...BTW, who are these 99 nayanmars? You dont seem to know the count too. Anyway, i have provided all the references sanskrit texts only. "The 10 mukhya upanishads are inclined towards non duality". That us you view. There are sufficient evidences in these 10 upanishads alone to show, they talk about pure duality. Your view need not be right view.
@Krishna, my view has more percentage in correctness. The Maitrāyaṇīya Upanishad directly says _Deity worship can be rewarding, but must be temporary, replaced with meditation and self knowledge - Fourth Prapathaka_ - The problem is that most people are simply interested in translation given by their gurus, and not the actual Upanishad. And that's why we have so many perspectives, and in turn, as many Sampradays. Please refer pure texts.
@Om Shankar - It is your view. Not univeral view.. But, the right view is that the pure texts talk about duality in absolute terms, too...You, keep repeating the same story, because you haven't read anything, is very clear...Going by your own standards " What is pure texts?" Whether it is works of shankarA or Vedas per se or mukhya Upanishads or works of genuine advaita acharyad like Anandagiri etc or pseudo works of Pseudo advaitins. Enjoy your maya and avidya
@Krishna, which pure texts? you mean to say the texts that speak your philosophy are pure, and mine are impure? What funny argument!! It seems I am fine and you are getting agitated - this is actually a bad impression. A mayavadi should get more irritated. Also, I completely understand that Mayavad is not fully correct. But what you are saying is that you are 100% right, and Mayavad is 100% wrong - Now I know that this is 100% non-provable. So my advise to you would be follow your faith, but don't say that other's faith is wrong.
@Om Shankar - So, you dont understand what i meant..Unfortunately i just reiterated your own question and you are just beating around the bush, by making more illusory assumptions...This is highest double standards..I too say, the same, dont call yourself a advaitin, call yourself a shaiva or may be a shakta.Dont pretend dear..
Om shankar - You are just one of those with Shaiva background...Ha..Ha ..You say "i am agitated", That itself shows that you are 100 % confused and equally arrogant, if not more...If you dont like the 100% truth, pls close your eyes, wear bells like ghantakarna and become more vishnu dveshi. Ultimately that is what you and your pseudo company are in reality.
@Krishna, I have no claims to make. I reiterated the statements, because it is very hard for you to digest them and prove them wrong. So you are stuck on an inferior position of the debate, like in a loophole. How do you wish to take this debate further, without coming out from there. I am waiting for you. Give me some sensible logic and don't retell the same answers and clause that is told again and again by Dvaita philosophers (or merely followers) - Shankaracharya has defeated time and again.
@Krishna, it is you who is making a claim here. I am fine with not being 100% right. It's you who cannot digest. You need to desperately prove that others are wrong. So agitation, right now, is your visible quality ;)
illusory assumptions?? ha ha. There are so many assumptions that Dvaitists make. Ask them, and they say "just have faith". Same things is applicable to Mayavadis too. There is no difference between Vishnu and Shiva, and therefore, by following Shiva, one can never be Vishnu Dveshi.
**Conclusion**: Considering all the scriptures, and texts, and not just sectarian literature, and looking at how I have defeated your clauses - **It can never be proven that one is more Supreme than other**
@Om Shankar - You say that " you have defeated my clauses.."...ha, ha look who talking and passing judgements?...You are the most confused person on the planet. So, better get some treatment...Be happy in the illusive victorious, avidya filled world...THE ONLY CONCLUSION is you are mighty confused veera shaiva acting as pseudo advaitin and you dont know and have neither read anything worthwhile.You call me sectarian, but in reality you are one of the biggest sectarian along with your fellow brotherhood of CSSPA (Confused Shaiva Shakta pseudo advaitins)
@Om Shankar - Even advaitins make multitude of assumptions...I spoke about your assumptions...You, dont even understand plain simple english. Many famous advaitins like Vidyaaranya etc lost to dvaitins...So, dont brag about adi Shankara...The present day shankaracharyas, everyone knows, their very character...So, dont tread that dangerous path..
@Om Shankar - You say "There is no difference between Vishnu and Shiva, and therefore, by following Shiva, one can never be Vishnu Dveshi" . No and Yes. No, because Vishnu and Shiva are not one, Even Adi Shankara has clearly accepted the supremacy of Lord Vishnu over other deities. Yes, there are some genuine advaitins (you and your fellow pseudo advaitins dont belong) who may worship Shiva and other deities too as guru who teaches them the actual Supreme Suddha sattva saguna brahman, i.e. Lord Vishnu.
@Om Shankar -Even dvaitins, madhvacharya followers worship other deities for material gains etc but that doesnt make all deities equal. These class of people, are not Vishnu dveshis. Infact they are all can be classified as vaishnavas only. But, people like you and your common brother hood confused Veera Shaiva's and some Shakta's who mask as pseudo advaitins can be considered as Vishnu dveshis only. Internally, all CSSPA's are Vishnu dveshis only, however hard you might act and pretend.
@Om Shankar - Absolutely. You keep repeating and beating about the bush saying maitrayay iya upanishad, water, H20, salt etc. But, you dont answer any questions that are posed.. You look only through tbe narrow prism of non duality verses completely ignoring duality verses from upanishas. This shows your double standards. Upanishads are true and you need to reconcile both non dual and dual verses and not indulge in putting aside either one of them..This is beyond your and Pseudo advaitins intellectual capabities
@Krishna, now let this argument be where it is. I am not going to give importance to your clauses which are off topic and bring small doubts. You and your philosophy fails to explain bigger doubts, and so does Mayavad. So never again speak that you are absolutely right and others are absolutely wrong. Because you can never prove what is Absolute - all your references and arguments are **relative** to sectarian literature and your philosophy
@Om Shankar - If some one shuts his eyes and mind and keeps harping that "every thing is same", "your are not absolutely true" etc, one can only feel sorry for you. Anyway, be blind and enjoy your Veera Shaiva matha.. Dont pretend as an advaitin. All your references are also not just sectarian but are also DUBIOUS. So, first stop quoting from dubious texts written by CSSPA's. Siva, Rudra, Parvati, Ganesa, Kartkeya etc can neither be proved as saguna brahman or nirguna brahman by all the your brotherhood of CSSPAs put together. Enjoy your Avidya and maya
@Krishna, why are you adamant on your points? I already said that I am not at Advaitin side. But, I will make sure to **defeat you** whenever you open your mouth and say that you are right, and others are wrong. Because you cannot prove that. Let's admit that you are at a same point as the Advaitins. No better than that, in fact worse - because Vedic literature (except Sectarian) is more inclined to Advaita
@Om shankar - Why are you too adamant on your points? Remember, you started all this. I dont know you and dont care about what you are or your views. Dont pretend. Your true nature is out. NOW you threaten me, typical Veera Shaiva attitude. No one is afraid of your threats..Only, avidya filled people like you think about victory and defeat only, nothing beyond it..You are a biggest ignoramuse on the forum, so dont act.VEDIC TEXTS ARE ALIGNED WITH BOTH DUALITY and NON DUALITY. Just because you dont understand and cant explain and reconcile, world wont collapse, superiorly confused con artist.
@Krishna, regarding the first line of your answer: `Please read the Mahabharata carefully` - the OP has already given an Edit reference: The Mahabharata, Anusasana Parva -> Veda Vyasa Mahabharata, where Vishnu mentions Shiva as Supreme. I think you yourself are not reading Mahabharata **carefully**, _edit_: and also the question :)
@Om Shankar - Here you go again. These episodes are interpolations. Adi Shankara never quoted such bogus interpretation. Adi Shankara even clarifies that Vishnu worship is more superior to Siva worship in his bhasyas. Also, Read Madhvacharyas Mahabharata tatparya nirnaya, tamil mahabhrata etc. These incidents is not even mentioned.
@Om Shankar - At least the great acharyas would have given some explanation, if at all such incidents existed in moola mahabharata. Moreover, you are being too selective, because in the same Vyasa Mahabharata, Brahma chastises Siva for fighting Narayana and clearly expains that siva is created by Narayana. There are many incidents in moolam mahabharata where Siva himself accepts the superiority of Vishnu. So, it is you who needs to read and re- read more carefully, until you get it right. Anyway, your narrow mind will ignore all these, because pseudo advaitins suffer from selective amnesia :-)
Krishna and @OmShankar - Please post any further comments to each other in this chat room: http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/29765/discussion-on-answer-by-krishna-why-shiva-does-not-worship-anybody-where-as-vish
@Krishna, please, be specific. Don't gave vague comments. Please prove your statement: *in the same Vyasa Mahabharata, Brahma chastises Siva for fighting Narayana and clearly expains that siva is created by Narayana* - **I don't think that's right**. May be you are reading a re-telling of Mahabharata from a non-bona fide source.
@Krishna, you look like someone who has limited his knowledge to only Vaishnava literature. **Why should I read Madhyvacharya's Tatparya**? tatparya = purpose, and purpose is already clear by the original texts. Why should I read something that came much later, and tamil mahabharata? why? - You really need to look back at your sources! There is no interpolation, the clear reference by the OP has been given. You can only do one thing: give up and accept defeat. Accept that you don't have enough valid bonafide sources to prove your statements, **other than sectarian literature**.
@Krishna, Brahma's one of the heads was cut by Shiva and Shiva is much superior to Brahma. In no way, **none of the literature on earth** (except what you read), not even a single instance in any literature, does Brahma explain anything to Shiva. Brahma only revers Shiva. Even ISKCON does not confirm this. Dude, you need a lot of correction, and a right guru. ISKCON has a lot of bonafide and correct gurus. Make sure you are following the right person.
Vishnu or Krishna is the Supreme Being and He is worshiped and followed by Shiva's incarnations. For example Hanuman was an incarnation of Shiva and Rama was an incarnation of Vishnu, as Wikipedia states
Hanuman is mentioned as an avatar of Shiva or Rudra in the Sanskrit texts like the Mahabhagvata Purana, the Skanda Purana, the Brhaddharma Purana and the Mahanataka among others.
Additional this article sates that,
Believed to be an avatar of Lord Shiva, Hanuman is worshiped as a symbol of physical strength, perseverance and devotion.
We know from the scriptures Hanuman followed Rama.
Another point is Shiva holds river Ganges on his head which originates at the lotus feet of Vishnu. So it is not right to say that Shiva doesn't worship Vishnu.
Most importantly Krishna, the complete avatar clearly reveals in the Gita that He is the Supreme Being in manifest form.
I found that nearly every Purana states its main diety as the supreme one. And sometimes to support that they also say that the deity was there from the beginning and then he later gets incarnated into his physical incarnation, so considering all this what I assume is that there is one supreme God, which the Shiva Puran calls Sadashiva, Vishnupuran calls Mahavishnu, Bramhapuran calls.
This supreme God might be nirakar, ajanma, etc. Then he created 3 main dieties Bramha, Vishnu and Rudra which are actually 3 powers of the supreme one only and then they further created, handled or destroyed all other creations. We have seen pictures of all of these 3 dieties to be meditating. Now, if anyone of them is supreme then why are they praying, so they must be praying the supreme God which we call by different names, i.e Sadashiva or Mahavishnu or Parabramha, etc. If we consider Muslim religion also, there is no physical God, its also that Nirakaar Supreme God which they call as Allah. Similarly, in Christianity also there was an invisible God whose only voice was heard and later Jesus was said to be the son of that God.
This is what I feel. Sorry, if I have hurt anyone's religious feelings but if we think this way then there would be no religious clashes/biases/etc.
This is very good thought but in hinduism that No physical god is our Shivalinga.. which is symbol of God's "no physical" state. In hinduism main GOD is shivalingam only. which is nirakar. We have no religious clashes.
Nirakar or Nirguna which many people take as absolute attributeless is also against the vedas because Vedas talk about Saguna and Nirguna, both, and one cannot say Vedas are partially correct and partially wrong. The moment you say Shivalinga or God etc it because saguna and cannot be Nirguna in literal terms..So, one needs to understand what this nirguna which the scriptures indicate. There is nothing called absolute nirguna ..There is only one Supreme god as per hinduism, but it is Saguna only and nirgunattva has to be explained keeping in mind that it doesn't impact the saguna concept.
And let us not confuse with other religions and get carried away by other reliongs like Islam, chritianity etc. which don't accept vedas. There are certain aspects and aphorisms which are common among many of the religions but that doesn't make god formless..If, one cannot fathom his greatness leave it to them, but comparing with other religions is absolutely not required.
As far as I know, None of these trio comparable to each other, they have their own significance.
- G : Generator ==> Brahma who create this world
- O : Operator ==> Vishnu who run the world
- D : Destroyer ==> Shiva who destruct the world
and coming to the question "Why Vishnu worship Shiva?" because Vishnu is only incarnated as human being of Supreme GOD on time to time ( From Satyuga to Kalyuga ) to guide and teach the lesson to live life and worship is also a part of human life.
This explanation is back-calculation. Please see english dictionaries to know the source of the word 'God'.
Lord Shiva addressed his wife, Parvati:
sri rama rama rameti rame rame manorame; sahasra nama tat tulyam rama nama varanane "O Varanana (lovely-faced woman), I chant the holy name of Rama, Rama, Rama and thus constantly enjoy this beautiful sound. This holy name of Ramachandra is equal to one thousand holy names of Lord Vishnu." (Brhad-visnu-sahasranama-stotra, Uttara-khanda, Padma Purana 72.335)
Lord Shiva always meditates on the supreme Narayana. The supreme had taken many avatars but only a few important named as dasavatara became prominent. When ever the supreme incarnated he performed the activities in respect of the law of nature and of the materialistic world, to set an example for the human generations.
Shiva and shakthi are responsible for this materialistic creation and lord vishnu is the original seed giving father(supersoul or the paramatman) of the living beings.
Lord shiva worshipped krishna and danced with him as a gopi name Gopeeshvara. Lord shiva served Lord ram in his rudra avatar as lord hanuman. Lord shiva lost battle to lord krishna in the battle against banasur and many more incidents are there which support lord narayans supremacy.
But lord vishnu and lord siva are non-different, Lord narayana had taken the mode of tamas for the destruction of the creation and he incarnated as lord shiva, and similarly he had taken the mode of rajas for the purpose of creation and he was called lord brahma.
This view can be easily understood from the idol of anantha padmanabha swamy in trivandrum.
Narayanena Chita Padukabhyam, Namo Namah Shankar parvati bhyam - Uma Maheshwar Stotra. This means that the lotus feet of Shiva is in the heart of Narayana.
"Lord vishnu is the original seed giving father" - where is it mentioned? Krishna says in BG. But Krishna is speaking as Supreme personality of Godhead. Which is also Shiva. So the same statement and BG will still hold good when Shiva speaks, or Rama speaks. or any incarnation of Shiva speaks. Lord shiva worshipped krishna - no account of this other than SB. Krishna worshipped Shiva and Durga too, as per Mahabharata.
Supreme personality is indifferent from lord Krishna. Krishna's tu bhagavan svayam. Supreme is one he is not many. Lord Shiva is tamas form of Bhagavan Krishna. Supreme himself said in BG among the rudras he is sankara. Lord Krishna worships his devotees more than himself it can be known from how he cleaned the foot of sages, rishi narada and his friend sudama. He smears the dust from the feet of his devotees. He displays all the qualities which he created and thus displaying his absolute nature.
Please read BG for full description the supreme person himself says that fools try to deride him when he descends in human form. You can also refer terms like vasudevam sarvam iti and aham bija pita in BG slokas to understand true nature of the absolute personality.
you are again only referencing Vaishnava literature and Vaishnava translation of Bhagvad Gita. The Mayavadis also follow the same Bhagvad Gita, but they don't believe what you say - I don't have to re-read any scripture. I am just saying that you cannot say **absolutely**, but only relatively.
@OmShankar U can ask a sanskrit scholar for the literal meaning of the words given by the supreme.Mayavadis gave their own cooked up interpretation, when lord clearly says he is everything. I don't understand why can't people come out of their false dogmas and give their own interpretations.If you know sanskrit please do read it word by word and understand, don't go by the mis-interpretations of many. BG is widely intrepreted scripture in the world where many covert saints give their interpretation according to their whims and fantancies. Keep aside the sectarian rules and read it truly.
the problem is not with **literal** meaning of the word. The problem is that you guys consider literal meaning only as per your convenience. For eg., when the BG also has literal meaning hinting towards Advaita and Mayavad, at that time you switch to **general** meaning. Prabhupad repeatedly tells that Mayavadis can understand so and so from this and that sloka - but that is wrong understanding. - Why does he tell like that? Because the literal meaning is Advaita inclined. So if you want to be literal, be completely literal, not just sometimes !!
Some references from Bhagavadgita which strictly speaks about monotheism and one supreme god that is Lord Krishna/Narayana.
BG 7:7 "mattah parataram nanyat kincid asti dhananjaya mayi sarvam idam protam sutre mani-gana iva"
O conquerer of wealth [Arjuna], there is no Truth superior to Me. Everything rests upon Me, as pearls are strung on a thread.
Here Bhagavan says "mattah parataram nanyat kincid asti" there is no one***(nanyat)* superior(parataram) to me even a little *(kinchit asti)***
So Lord Krsna clearly says that he is the supreme truth.
BG 14:4 "sarva-yonisu kaunteya murtayah sambhavanti yah tasam brahma mahad yonir aham bija-pradah pita"
It should be understood that all species of life, O son of Kuntī, are made possible by birth in this material nature, and that I am the seed-giving father.
Here Bhagavan Krsna clearly says that is the original father of all living entities(aham bija-pradah pita).
It is propounded in the puranas that Lord Shiva lies dormant and then when Goddess impregnates him the materialistic creation has come to being and the spiritual aspect of creation that is atman has come from Paramatman(supreme soul)/Parabrahman Narayana/Krsna. At the end of kalpa all the souls merge into the supreme Narayana and again at the beginning of kalpa they are manifested again(as per BG).
BG 10:23 "rudranam sankaras casmi vitteso yaksa-raksasam vasunam pavakas casmi meruh sikharinam aham"
Here Bhagavan says that among the rudras he is Shankara(the foremost of the rudras) and also he says that he is Vishnu(as vamana) among the adityas.
The supreme being is "ONE AND ONLY ONE" he can't be many.
All the species are his manifestations and the foremost(in his qualities) of these are considered his avataras.
His expansions are infinite though he incarnates with some of his qualities he is eternally present in paramdhamam vaikunta always.
Like wise he incarnations are also eternally present like Varaha(in varaha kshetra tirupathi), Nrishmha, Vamana(patala), Parashuram(mahendragiri/himalayas).
Lord Vishnu is also the expansion of the Supreme Being Narayana/Krsna for preservation and protection.
Bhagavan Krsna is the incarnation of the supreme to the fullest, where he displayed all the qualities present in his creation. Bhagavan Krsna washed the feet of sages, narada marharshi, elders, his friend sudama and sprinkled water of their feet on his head, he also prayed to siva to have a child like him. Bhagavan Krsna sprinkled/smelled the padha dhooli (dust from the feet of his devotees). Bhagavan Krsna accepted curse of gandhari gracefully, he went to guru . as a ordinary child to have his education. And simultaneously he performed extraordinary feats including saving Lord Siva from Vrakasura and also defeated him war against banasura.
Bhagavan taught us though being supreme he taught us how to lead our lives, he has done the karma what an ordinary being born on this planet should do and at same time he does anything for upholding the dharma and for protection of his devotees.
Bhagavan respected the laws of nature of this planet and never went against them for his personal needs, he followed them gracefully. So he worshiped gods(whom he delegated power for the governance of this materialistic world) to attain things as per the laws of this planet. He also ascertain in Bhagavadgita that whatever form of god you worship/or sacrifice you perform is ultimately addressed to him. So as the eternal soul (bija pita) of all the beings he is worshipping himself.
The mind of supreme is difficult to comprehend even for the greatest of the minds. Only by constant meditation/devotion to him he can/his nature can be known (lord shiva engaged in meditation thus knows about the supreme actions).
The best known scripture which describes GOD and qualities of GOD to the fullest is the BHAGAVADGITA and it clearly establishes Krsna/Narayana as the ultimate reality, the absolute truth and the cause of all causes.
So by inferring logically from scriptural evidences Krsna/Narayana is the supreme.
Check my comments to Krishna's answer. Your conclusion **inferring logically from scriptural evidences** - does not hold good, as you are considering only the Vaishnava literature, only Vaishnava Puranas, and translations by Vaishnava Sampradays. The same BG is translated by Mayavadis who are also following disciplic succession. You have ignored that. BG has lot of slokas which simply hint Advaita.
It's not true that Vishnu worships Shiva in all His incarnations but Shiva doesn't worship Vishnu at all.
Hanuman, the greatest devotee of Sri Rama, was an incarnation of Shiva:
चक्रे स्वं क्षुभितं शम्भुः कामबाणहतो यथा। स्वं वीर्यमपातयामास रामकार्यार्थमीश्वरः॥ ४॥
तद्वीर्यं स्थापयामासुः पत्रे सप्तर्षयश्च ते। प्रेरिता मनसा तेन रामकार्यार्थमादरात्॥ ५॥
तैर्गौतमसुतायां तद्वीर्यं शम्भोर्महर्षिभिः। कर्णद्वारा तथाञ्जन्यां रामकार्यार्थमाहितम्॥ ६॥
ततश्च समये तस्माद्धनूमानिति नामभाक्र। शम्भुर्जज्ञे कपितनुर्महाबलपराक्रमः॥७॥
Like a person suffering from lust, Siva at the instance, the saptarsis, (the Seven sages) carried the semen of Siva, for the purpose of Šrī Rāma, with respect, over the tree leaf and inserted the same in the ear of Anjani the daughter of Gautama, through ear to her Womb. Then after some time, Siva appeared in the form of a monkey by name of Hanuman who was quite valorous. (Shiva Purana, Satarudriya Samhita, Chapter 20)
Therefore, as the following verses from the Harivamsa Parva of the Mahabharata states, we can conclude that both Shiva and Vishnu worship each other since they are the same Lord:
mArkaNDeya uvAcha shivAya viShNurUpAya viShNave shivarUpiNe |
yathAntaraM na pashyAmi tena tau dishataH shivam || 2-125-29
mArkaNDeya said: I do not see any difference between shiva in the form of viShNu and viShNu in the form of shiva. They provide auspiciousness to the world.
rudrasya paramo viShNurviShNoshcha paramaH shivaH |
eka eva dvidhA bhUto loke charati nityashaH || 2-125-41
The supreme lord of rudra (shiva) is viShNu and the supreme lord of viShNu is shiva (rudra). The same lord is moving in the world always in two forms.
na vinA sha~NkaraM viShNurna vinA keshavaM shivaH |
tasmAdekatvamAyAtau rudropendrau tu tau purA |
viShNu does not exist without sha~Nkara (shiva) and shiva does not exist without keshava (viShNu). Hence, rudra (shiva) and upendra (kR^iShNa - viShNu) have attained oneness, since long before.
namo rudrAya kR^iShNAya namaH saMhatachAriNe || 2-125-42
I bow to rudra (shiva). I bow to kR^iShNa. I bow to the one moving in the combined form.
From Essence of Devi Bhagavata Purana hosted on kamakoti website:
King Janamejaya was still unconvinced as to why Sri Krishna had to pray to Maha Deva Siva, as He Himself was a fulfledged Incarnation of Maha Vishnu. Maharshi Vyasa had already explained the position and further clarified as follows: Sri Krishna was an Incarnation of Maha Vishnu but not Maha Vishnu Himself.Any human ‘Avatara’ was to be considered in the context of a human being and could not, repeat not, be imagined other-wise as human features, qualities and action-reaction pattern or cause and effect syndrome ought to be similar, although perhaps the impact of Maha Maya might be less pronounced in the context of Incarnations as in the case of ordinary human beings.This fact was described and emphasised in the earlier pages.