[Advaita-l] ***SPAM*** Vijayendra tirthas reply to appaya

[V Subrahmanian]

Dear Raghav ji,

What you say is perfectly acceptable.  Just see an example of how they
indulge in downgrading/denigrating Shiva:

In this video talk, from 21 minutes onward, the Madhva scholar relates the
incident of Krishna doing penance for progeny at Kailasa to propitiate
Shiva.  The scholar reveals two reasons why Krishna did the tapas: 1.
Krishna wanted to teach the world, by example, that whoever has impediments
in getting progeny should worship Shiva and thereby get over the
impediment. 2.And this is really amusing:  If someone thinks that Krishna
really prayed to Shiva for progeny and that in the absence of Shiva's grace
Krishna would never have had progeny at all, Krishna wants such people to
fall into the hell called andham tamas. (So, Krishna is laying a trap to
catch people to be consigned to andham tamas hell).  So, these are the two
purposes for which Krishna went to Kailasa.  The scholar invokes the Rg
Veda to substantiate his idea that Krishna did not really bow to Shiva; he
bowed only to himself, the antaryami of Shiva.  And Shiva bowed in return.

The Bhashya of that Rg vedic mantra, however, never means this, as per
Sayana:

2.33.12 कु॒मा॒रश्चि॑त्पि॒तरं॒ वन्द॑मानं॒ प्रति॑ नानाम रुद्रोप॒यन्त॑म् ।
भूरे॑र्दा॒तारं॒ सत्प॑तिं गृणीषे स्तु॒तस्त्वं भे॑ष॒जा रा॑स्य॒स्मे ॥१२  The
Bhashya  वंदमानं आयुष्मान् भव सौम्येति स्तुवंतं पितरं कुमारश्चित् यथा
कुमारः ॥ चिदित्येतदुपमार्थे ॥ हे रुद्र उपयंतमस्मत्समीपे गच्छंतं त्वां
प्रतिननाम । प्रतिनतोऽस्मि । अपि च भूरेर्बहुनो धनस्य दातारं सत्पतिं सतां
पालयितारं । पत्यावैश्वर्य इति पूर्वपदप्रकृतिस्वरत्वं ॥ हे रुद्र एवंभूतं
त्वां गृणीषे । स्तौमि ॥ मिपस्तिङां तिङो भवंतीति से आदेशः ॥ स्तुतश्च
त्वमस्मे अस्मभ्यं भेषजा भेषजानि रासि । देहि । ।

Their penchant for cooking up stories where the word Rudra occurs is well
known; the Keshi suktam is one such where the read the Amrita mathana story
to pass off the idea that it was Vayu who rid the poison of its original
potency before Rudra drank it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AmuJqpj_Few

Such is their struggle to somehow ward off any Rudra Supremacy statement by
the Veda or Veda Vyasa.  Their angst against the Veda and Vyasa they are
expressing in these amusing ways.

regards
subbu

On Fri, Oct 2, 2020 at 9:31 PM Raghav Kumar Dwivedula via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> Namaste Venkatesh Murthy ji
>
>
>
> On Thu, 1 Oct, 2020, 9:01 PM Venkatesh Murthy via Advaita-l, <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
> > Namaste
> >
> >
> >
> > I have tried to argue with them (dvaitins) but they are not following any
> > rules of
> > debate and are very cunning in twisting the texts of Upanishads, Vedas,
> and
> > Brahma Sutras to mean whatever they want.
>
>
> It's sad to see that they distort shruti to such an extent. I appreciate
> your sincerity in engaging with them.
>
> It is useless to argue against
> > them. My suggestion is Dont waste time with them but study Advaita only.
> >
>
> You genuine suggestion to focus purely on Advaita is logical.
>
>  I understand that Sri Kaushik feels hurt by the derogatory/ condescending
> references by dvaitins to Parameshwara Shiva. That is why he wishes to know
> if the dvaita objections have been dismissed or are they still standing.
>
> I am reminded of a related point about what a "Bhakta" is, in psychological
> terms, from what Swami Dayananda Saraswati Ji would teach. He would explain
> that the connection between a Bhakta and Bhagavan is deeper than any other
> role a human may play in his life. That bhakta is the basic or core person
> who plays various changing roles like husband, wife, father, son, brother,
> mother, sister, employee etc. These roles played in life change but the
> basic conscious being who plays these impermanent roles, is the bhakta, who
> is intrinsically and always, related to Ishvara like even a tree is
> intrinsically connected to the forest.
>
> Now, when someone attacks or abuses that role, the basic person, the
> bhakta, or demeans his Ishvara, then the innermost aspect of the person is
> affected - it is violence of a very damaging kind. That is why Christian
> proselytizing for 'converting' Hindus, is a blatantly *violent act* which
> hurts Hindus at a very deep level.
>
> Until Advaita is well-appreciated, a similar hurt is sustained by many
> bhaktas when the dvaitins abuse the Gurus like Shankara bhagavatpAda or
> speak condescendingly of Bhagavan Shiva. The wound sustained by a Shiva
> bhakta or Guru bhakts is likely to be quite deep. The bhakta is vulnerable,
> till advaita understanding is reached.
>
> After Advaita appreciation is clear, the dvaita arguments will seem crazy
> and incredible. The advaitin may still amuse himself with trying to frame
> some counter arguments. Or he may ignore them, since they don't make any
> impression on him.
>
> Om
> Raghav
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>