Accuracy of predictions

Phalani grahacharena suchayanti manishinah ko vaktah taratamyasya tamekam vedhasam vina

Can astrologers claim he can give most accurate predictions?

The above shloka says Astrologers can only indicate the results of the planets , only Bramha can give exact quantum of the result.

This shows that when somebody has forecasted a good phase , it cannot turn out to be opposite. but how good? it is not the purview  of the astrologer. Only bramha can say that because he is the provider. lets dwell more on it.

a capacity of astrologer is limited to the domain he is inspecting. what are domains, luck pours from heavens, it also pours from blessings of elders, it also is enhanced by good wishes of friends and acquaintance. now how much each influence is subject to the domain under analysis. friends good wishes can get nullified by curses of elders. heavens gift can overcome a curse.

similarly a heavens wrath can overtake a boon.if you are predicting only considering a previous gift , and overlook a present curse , predictionswould go offtrack.

example: Shiva had given boons to jarasandha kichaka, bakasura,hidimba etc boons of being never faced with death, immortality. all astrologers looking at these horoscopes say they are immortals.even Indra and others  could not match these demons because of the boons and had to flee. suggesting immortality. Bheemasena killed all these ,that means he has overtaken these boons. Bheemasena was more powerful, for these demons a  brush with more powerful nullified their boons. Bheemasena was devotee of Krishna , if Bheemasena could kill these demons mean he is superior to Shiva, because He is devotee of Krishna , Krishna is supreme than Vayu (Bheema) and Shiva.

only to prove this Krishna avoided killing jarasandha ,to the extent he settledin Dwaraka than Mathura. he wanted to show if my devotee can nullify the boons of Shiva ,so can I. only superiors can overtake juniors’ orders.Hence when sages predict , they predicted immortality to jarasandha, because they fell short of analysis beyond Shiva. However VedVyasa predicted death to these.

Never hurt elders,superiors and Devatas, these can foretell misfortune ,even death,even if you are in good phase of your life.

srikrishnarpanamastu

Comments on: "Accuracy of predictions" (373)

  1. Hare Srinivasa !!!

    Taratamya is inherent; this is present in Upanishads as well as in Puranas.

    Let us take astras; mebbe that will be better to understand; to make it easier to understand remember Ramanand Sagar’s Ramayana depiction two shiny astras meet half way and the more powerful astra prevails and weaker astra vanishes ( that is Taratamya )

    Now in astras everyone knows Brahma astra is ultimate; because Brahma is presiding deity. Shiva astra though important is not considered the most powerful; why is this ?

    In Mahabharata; Ashwattamma leaves an astra Narayana Astra ; which bring the entire Pandava army to it’s knees (except SriKrishna and Bheemsena Devaru). Arjuna who has knowledge of Pashupat astra (presided by Shiva) and Brahma astra keeps down his weapon; he does not fire these because they would not nullify this astra ( SriHari sarvothamma !!!)

    In Banasura episode; Shiva protecting Banasura leaves Shiva Jvara and SriKrishna leaves Vishnu Jvara. Shiva Jvara begs Vishnu Jvara to leave it ( again SriHari sarvothamma proved !!! )

    For Tripura destruction; Shiva used astra presided by Narayana and recited Vishnu Panjara Stotra ( again SriHari sarvothamma proved )

    In Mahabharata; as Ashwathamma ( Rudra avataara ) he asks SriKRishna for Sudarshana Chakra but he can’t even lift it ( again SriHari sarvothamma proved )

    You have accepted that moksha is given by SriHari alone; why because one who is nitya mukta can give Moksha. A person who is bound himself; how can he free others? So SriHari is nitya mukta; HE alone gives moksha. Moksha is the highest purushartha; therefore giver of highest Purushartha is highest ( SriHari sarvothamma again proved !!!)

    Gange is water that Brahma collects and worships SriHari’s feet; this nirmalya is collected by Shiva. It is most dear to Shiva; hence he is called Abhisheka Priya in Vedas; which is why you have the kalash of water; with water dripping onto the linga. Now you tell me who is greater the one whose feet are worshipped or the one who puts this water on his head? ( Yet again SriHari sarvothamma proved )

    See Shiva himself; the ganga on his head is indicative of SriHari nirmalya !!! ( Hari Sarvothamma ) Shiva also carries chandra on his head; Chandra has vishesha amsha of Brahma/Vayu. So his message is Hari Sarvothamma !!! Vayu Jeevothamma !!!

    See the depictions of Shiva and Brahma; they are always in tapas. Why because they are doing dhyana of SriHari all the time and they have mentioned this repeatedly. Look at SriHari … reclining on AdiShesha? Because he is nitya mukta; others have yet to acheive that !!! ( Again Hari Sarvothamma proved !!! ) ( BTW; these depictions are as per dhyana shlokas )

    The entire universe is after MahaLakshmi; right from wealth to knowledge to prosperity; and what does MahaLakshmi do; She presses SriHari’s legs !!! ( Again Hari Sarvothamma !!! proved )

    Let us see Bhaktas; how have worshippers of Shiva fared? Prahalada’s one hair could not be moved; enough said ( SriHari Sarvothamma !!! )

    Jai Bharateesha !!!

    Like this

  2. sanjaytavargeri said:

    I concur with Sonu ji and Rajesh menon ji..Debating with Mathur is to keep going in loops like this is mischievous at best and stupid at worst. In either case, there is no value in engaging with him!
    a rare feat that Mathur has achieved by being naive and condescending..i could not resist quoting
    Mark Twain:
    Never argue with stupid,
    people, they will drag you
    down to their level and beat
    you with their experience..

    though he will not BE STILL ABLE TO “BEAT” US IN ANY WAYS..
    Regards,
    Sanjay

    Like this

  3. Hariprasad said:

    >>”Indra addresses Vishnu as “sureshvara” which supports import of Verse 18 that Vishnu is just a >>deva”

    Your reading and comprehension ability is pathetic.

    In the same set of shlokas, this is what Indra says.

    1) gati paraayanam naasti trailokya sacharaachare
    2) tvayaa srushtamidam *sarvam* trailokyam sacharaacharam
    3) tvameva *bhagavansarve* pravishanti yugakshaye

    Can you understand statement 3 above? Do you understand what it means? Your theory about Vishnu being “just a deva” is blown out in those very verses!

    - Hariprasad

    Like this

  4. HARI N ji, He is both I think..

    1) an ignorant fool and (2) a shameless liar. !

    Like this

    • Good way to debate calling your opponent names when you have no substance to support your claims still you are living in denial.

      Like this

      • harshala said:

        chal .. Mathurji…

        Spare us from getting to suffer through the depth of a human-being’s ignorance…

        Just tell us What you want to prove…

        Joh bhi hai… Put it in points.. what is it that you want to prove…

        Vishnu ke bade bai kaun, who is his uncle, who is his aunty, sab kuch …

        No need to give any web shloka reference from anywhere… just in your language… baas.. thats enough…

        Like this

  5. Namaskar GURUDEV and all,

    I have read only 6-7 posts of Mr.Parijat yet…and this one could give HEART ATTACK…what he replied to Hari N ji..

    ‘With your verse ref. it is clear that Vishnu is incapable of killing Ravana, he fears for his reputation as being regarded as one who always kills his enemy when participating in war which is “durlabha kamo” when it comes to Ravana, he has to wait till birth as Manushya. Indra is ashrayaheena & now has to face Ravana by himself.’

    ‘VISHNU is incapable of killing Ravana…’ (TOO MUCH…. )…..In his horoscope there must be a strong SRI VISHNU DWESHI’ yoga for sure.

    He has created a big entertaining movie with title ‘SACH HUM NAHI JANTE – Iraada bhi nahi hai ‘…….(going to see this, today :) world wide hits must be watched.. ) ..I HAD MISSED A LOT……..he is leaving me farrrrrrrrr behind in writing… :)

    Masterji please Parijat bhai ke ‘wrong concepts and understanding ko ‘infinite – bilaang ‘ kam kar dijiye…!!!

    NEED HIS HOROSCOPE……we can learn a lot from this for sure…from astro point of view too that -

    1. How one can be a gr8 SRI VISHNU DWESHI ?
    2. How one can not understand even numbers of ppl try to make him understand..
    3. How a yog called ‘ Hum nahi manege – Hun nahi sudhrenge’ works ?
    4. How one can Irritate RUDRA DEV even by saying HE IS HIS BHAKTA…!
    5. many more ..SIR CAN TELL…!

    I have a strong feeling..PARIJAT bhai ke statements se toh Brahma lok tak mein halchal machh sakti hai…. kisi devta ka kahar na toote inn par……SRI NARAYAN – ‘The sarvesarva,The Sarvottama’ ke khilaaf itni talleenta se bolna wala …be-kauff insaan ka kya hoga…….we wish so….kisi devta ka kahar na toote inn par……what gochar is indicating for him..!!!

    KALI ne achcha agent bheja hai !!! NICE..! But still we have advantage…reading more and more from SIR and blog members abt HARI SARVOTTAMA and VAYU JIVOTTAMA only…

    P.S – Parijaat bhai ne agle janam mein atleast ‘MATHUR’ ( can be David…Peter…etc etc. .in next janama ) na rehne ki poori tayyari kar li hai…! Abhi bhi waqt hai…HANUMAAN ji pair pakad le toh alag baat hogi…!

    Thanks and Regards,
    Kalyani.

    Like this

    • “NEED HIS HOROSCOPE”

      I will honor your need. Good luck trying finding Hiranyakashipu/Ravana/… in me. Let’s see how much of jyaautishi you believe yourself to be now that you have forsaken debate & come down to such cheap personal attacks.

      Lagna: Meena
      Tanu Bhava: Shukra+Mangala+Budha
      Dhana Bhava: Surya
      Putra Bhava: Brihaspati
      Ari Bhava: Shani+Rahu
      Labha Bhava: Chandra
      Vyaya Bhava: Ketu

      Like this

      • Mr.Parijat ,

        Cheap personal attack ?? How can say so…??As supported one of our senior member’s comment as
        ‘ 1) an ignorant fool and (2) a shameless liar. ! ‘ App hi batayiye aap itne dinon se kya pradarshit kar rahe hain.??

        OR you felt bad abt what I said ‘ki aap next janam mein shayad MATHUR na hokar david/peter ho sakte hain.But thats true…Whoever says or goes against SRI HARI get lower birth only.Thats the fact. I was just doing repeat telecast..!

        RAM was not a deva..Is not it cheap statement?
        Impotency of RAMA….Is not it cheap statement?
        VISHNU is incapable of killing Ravana…Is not it cheap statement?
        You come here and start talking to our GURU by taking his name….Is not it cheap?

        Though I have asked for horoscope as I realy would like to know…how one can never understand when so many learned ppl are
        trying to make him understand few basics….and still he follow and make statements on the base of non reliable sources….And most amazing
        thing is how one can add so easily such hilarious adjectives like Impotent..etc to LORD?Ismein kya burai hai ki apka horo mannga…aap bhi hamara
        horo maang sakte hain..yeh janne ke liye ki yahan log itne HARI BHAKTT kyon hain…!

        Mr.Parijat I can also say that by using words like ‘Impotent ‘ to the most MARYADA PURUSHOTTAMA SRI RAM was akin to personal attack …..for any HARI BHAKTT.

        Jo bhi apko yahan bataya jaa raha hai…pehle usse confirm kar lijiye……..phir debate kijiye…!

        Thanks,
        Kalyani

        Like this

        • Hariprasad said:

          Mr VD,

          Pouring scorn on Lord Vishnu in a forum full of Vishnu Bhaktas is the biggest personal attack on the devotees. And you are doing it mindlessly.

          Your posts have revealed the fact that you are completely ignorant and your steadfastness in your beliefs have shown that you are a fool.

          You hide shlokas and quote selectively. So you are liar.

          They are statements of fact.

          - Hariprasad

          Like this

        • What sentimentalism. Am I talking to a “woman” here.

          Like this

          • @Parijat

            Wow, look who’s calling names now. Bade shareef ban rahe the na ab tak ? Achanak kya ho gaya miyan?

            There’s no more beating around the bush Mr. whatever, either one must be a Vishnu bhakta or a Vishnu dweshi. There’s no third categorisation of souls. If you are a bhakta you are welcome here. If you are not , you better clear off from here and make some better use of space and time than spamming the sanctity of Guruji’s blog.

            Like this

          • Parijat: UP ki bhasha mein samjhaun kya…chapad chapad band karo apni.

            Like this

          • RAJESH MENON said:

            Mr Parijat. What are you doing on this forum? If you do not believe in Hari Sarvottama and if you don’t respect Shri Chiraan or the other members, i suggest you to leave

            Like this

          • Mr.Parijat ,

            ‘Am I talking to a “woman” here…’ what does it mean bhai ? …3 comments apne padh liye apko yehi samjh nahi aaya ki ‘kalyani’ naamak vyakti ka gender kya hoga? bhaiyya ending with ‘NI’ toh female hi hogi na koi …abhi apko kya- kya batana padega bhai ??

            Please kindly settle SRI RAM somewhere in the tartamya…kabhi woh dev bhi nahi hote manushya ho jate hain ( manushya roop mein avtaar lena aur manushya hone bhi kuch fark hai ki nahi?? ) Phir achanak woh MOKSHA daata ‘ bhgawaan’ ho jaate hain…( waise apke anusaar MOKSHA
            kaun pradaan kar sakta hai ?idhar bhi apki theory kuch aur ho sakti hai isliye poocha )…ab manushya kaise Moksha pradan kar sakta hai ??
            Kuch derr baad aap yeh bhi keh sakte hain ‘main RAM hoon ‘ bcoz aap manuhsya hain..! Do you think deities and LORD names are toys to play with..??

            App jo bhi bole sab sahi…doosre bole toh apko aappatti hi aapatti..??

            ‘What sentimentalism’ ??…kyon bhai apke sentiments sab kuch…baki logon ke kuch bhi nahi….ek horoscope manga…aur abhi tak jo apne kiya uski summery di…toh apke dil ko zor ka jhattka laga…aur idhar aap bindass , Bhagwaan ke saath apni marzi se kuch bhi ‘ visheshan’ lagaye jaa rahe hain..jab ki aap jaante hain yeh site ka mool aadhar kya hai.. hum logon ke sentiments hurt nahi hone chahiye….WHY ?? Apne RUDRA DEV ki bhakti bhi imaandari se ki hoti toh abhi tak 10-12 din mein kuch toh dimaag mein chala hi jaata.

            But its seems your aim is ….’ neither not to give any new correct info….nor accepting the facts you donot know…

            Proof aap detein nahi…Jo aleardy proved hai woh aap maante nahi…CHAHTE KYA HAIN ??

            Thanks,
            Kalyani

            Like this

      • sanjaytavargeri said:

        Lagnadhipati though uccha since in Karak, who are extremely senti “mental”..Capricon chandra in labha..thats is why you are restrictive mean minded approach..materialistic and reserved attitude..Mars Merc in lagna and ravi in 2nd —this is where your haughtiness lies..I will keep playing with words and will continue abrasively because of being “highly sentimental” a Meena character..i can see why your thinking is impaired..mercury in meena..that why you are “dil logical” and directionalless..taking most unrelated incident personally..this is where it is comming from..that “my shiv ji is being insulted!!” vivhar heenata..confusions..not understanding what people are saying and why they are saying..Only plain brazenness..and thats ashtamadhipati is corrupting this poor fellow…getting him in to delusions!!

        NOW FOR THE MOST IMPORTANT PART:
        This is where his insanity comes from: ref – Indra is elder brother of Vishnu, = mental illness :)
        Saturn + Rahu —Resistance (Sat)+ desire(Rahu)..an unending fight with one own self…thats why he is going in circles !! we need to appreciate he was not born fully insane…
        Is not able to stick at one place…because of that inflated ego (Rahu in simha and 6th lord uccha)

        Like this

  6. MATHUR’s logic is self contradictory

    HE says VEDa cannot be considered as pramaana because it is BRAMHouvacha .. [ ie it is spoken by bramha ]

    BUT he quotes all from purana whcih is SPoken by SHIVA ..

    WHEn what is spoken by BRAMHA cannot be truth according to him then HOW cn something SPoken By SHIVA be truth ..

    If we accept whatever SHiva sys as TRUTh then WE have amply shown SHIVA himself saying KESHAVA as SUPREME .. RAMA’s name as SUPEREME ..
    BUT mathur is quiet on this ..

    HE says SHow one verse where SHIVA’s boon vara is over taken ..
    we have shown many verses which says UMAPATI var SHAnKAR vara ..
    where the reciever is given boon of not being killed by anyone [ ie immortal ] and yet HANUMAN kills .

    MATHUR now hides his face behind juggelery of words ,
    he says DID UMAPATy give vara of being not killed by HANUMAN ..

    NOw when one asks boon .. a warrior he may fight lakhs of warriors in his life .. does the GIVER of Boon ie SHANKAR or UMAPATi is expected to recite the names of all warriors that he may face and say you shall not be killed by these only then it will be valid .. and in the process if SHIVA misses the names ‘ SURESh MAHESH KALPESH ” he may get killed by them …
    isnt the logic pathetic .. impractical .. once if shankar says you cannot be killed , you cannot be killed by anyone ..

    THEN MATHUR say did SHIVA say not be killed by ant .. rat .. mouse , bandikoot , .. DOES HE EXPECT SHIVA to recite the names of 84 lakhs species to grant the boon ..
    and just because he missed a grasshopper in the process so akampan could be killed by grasshopper .

    MATHUR .. avahdyan avadhdhata means IMMorTALITY .. JUGGELERY OF WORDS WILL NOT GIVE YOU RIGHT knowledge ..

    YOu have yet again fallen flat on ground ..

    Like this

    • “JUGGELERY OF WORDS ”

      This is rather your speciality. I am merely humbly putting forth word by word implication of the shloka & I do not infer(by my limited intellect & unlike you) what verse writer has not mentioned explicitly.

      Like this

  7. @Parijat

    You have many misconceptions. Guruji is Vishnu bhakta but not Shiva/Brahma dweshi. He is sorting out who is who in this existance, that’s all. But it’s quite evident that you are Hari dweshi. And consequences for such an attitude can be miserable and undesirable. Only Shri Hari can save you, but those chances also look slim because you are calling Narayana abuses which is a henious sin. May LORD drill some sad-buddhi into your head.

    Like this

    • “Only Shri Hari can save you” “drill”

      That is rather Christian.

      Like this

      • @Parijat

        Thou shalt not be saved by the almighty God. ( Does this sound enough christian for you ? :D )

        Like this

    • “but not Shiva/Brahma dweshi”

      Just how do you know that your “Guruji” has no ershya of Brahmapada.

      “it’s quite evident that you are Hari dweshi. ”

      Who can have dvesha with Krishna who is tripura sunder? And what use will dvesha be with Krishna who is sarvadhika bali??

      You judge prematurely & presumptuously.

      Like this

      • @Parijat

        I know my Guruji has no dwesha for Brahma because, he is Hari Vayu Guru bhakta. And just so you know, Brahma and Vayu are in the same kaksha in tartamya ( I bet you didn’t get what this means ) and both are Uttama among jeevas and held in high esteem by Madhwas. In the next kalpa, Vayu becomes Brahma and current Brahma attains moksha. You can find evidence for this in Valmiki Ramayana, when Hanumanji successfully returns from Seetanveshana, Shri Raama embraces him and says that He will make Hanuman as next Brahma. Next, Guruji doesn’t have dwesha for Shiva because elsewhere just few days ago he told us that without Rudropasana it is impossible to get moksha and he will teach us how to do that. But such valuable teachings are not meant for people like you. That’s about my Guruji Shri Chiraan.

        Now coming to you, I know you are Hari dweshi for sure, because you have used phrases like ‘impotency of Raama’ and ‘your esteemed Vyasa’. Anyone with a iota of bhakti towards Shri Hari will never use such words for Him. And if you don’t know that Narayana, Krishna, Raama, Vedvyasa are all one and the same as HARI, you are no Haribhakta at all. Period.

        Like this

        • “without Rudropasana it is impossible to get moksha”

          You are kidding me. Hari is capable of giving moksha independent of Rudra, this is well known.

          “You can find evidence for this in Valmiki Ramayana, when Hanumanji successfully returns from Seetanveshana, Shri Raama embraces him and says that He will make Hanuman as next Brahma.”

          Now you are attempting to insult Hanumana. This is no surprise considering your cult’s history of denigrating Shiva/Brahma/…

          Hanumana is not cheap like your cult members to be desirous of Brahmapada.

          And, show me this supposed “evidence” in Valmiki Ramayana.

          Like this

          • Hariprasad Alur said:

            Parijat,

            >> You are kidding me. Hari is capable of giving moksha independent of Rudra, this is well known.

            Can you please quote ONE verse which states that other than Narayana who else can grant moksha!!!

            — Hariprasad

            Like this

          • @Parijat

            >You are kidding me. Hari is capable of giving moksha independent of Rudra, this is well known.>

            Now you got scared of being stamped as a Haridweshi and trying to switch sides. But this won’t work. Because earlier by your own admission you said ‘Vishnu is just a devata.’

            Yes, ultimately Hari grants moksha but to reach to that point you need to do upasana of Shiva. There’s one subtle point you are missing Mr. Parijat Mathur. And that is, no matter whoever devata it is , He / She is not independent of Hari. When I say Rudropasana, I mean Hari as present in Rudra, that is upasana of Rudra antargata Vayu antargata Sankarshana.

            >Now you are attempting to insult Hanumana. This is no surprise considering your cult’s history of denigrating Shiva/Brahma/…
            Hanumana is not cheap like your cult members to be desirous of Brahmapada. >

            Now let me make one more thing clear for you, Hanuman is Jeevottama and for Madhwas he is only next to Hari. And what is this ‘history of cult’ you are talking about. Try to make some sense, what history of Dwaita have you read to say that we insult Hanuman. Provide me evidence for this claim of yours. And if you do not know and do not want to know that in the next cycle of creation Vayu becomes Brahma, I cannot help you.

            Like this

          • Krishna Kadiri said:

            Valmiki Ramayana, UttarakANDa, 36th sarga 46th shloka (Gitapress edn):

            sarvAsu vidyAsu tapovidhAne praspardhate ayaM hi guruM surANAm |
            so.ayaM navavyAkaraNArthavettA brahmA bhaviShyatyapi te prasAdAt ||

            These are Sage Agastya’s words to Lord Rama about Hanuman. Note the words ‘he is guru of all gods’, and “he will become brahmA in future by your (Lord Rama’s) grace”.

            Like this

            • Hanuman Ashtottra itself clears all doubt !!!

              Om Sarva-maya-vibham-janaya namah
              Om Sarva-banda-vimokthre namah

              Om Para-vidhya-pariharaya namah
              Om Para-shourya-vinashanaya namah
              Om Paramamtra-niraakarte namah
              Om Parayantra-pradbedakaaya namah

              Om Sarwa-mantra-swarupine namah
              Om Sarwa-tantra-swarupine namah
              Om Sarwa-yantratmakaaya namah

              Future Brahma
              Om Bhavishya-chatu-rananaaya namah

              Brahmastra nivarana
              Om Indhra-jitpra-hitaa-mogha bramhastra nivaarakaaya namah

              Like this

            • “sarvAsu vidyAsu tapovidhAne praspardhate ayaM hi guruM surANAm |
              so.ayaM navavyAkaraNArthavettA brahmA bhaviShyatyapi te prasAdAt ||”

              See Verse45-47/Sarga36/Uttara kanda/Valmiki Ramayana here:
              http://valmiki.iitk.ac.in/index.php?id=sloka1

              Are you & your cult from where you seem to draw misguided interpretations of shastra crazy.

              How can Brahma give/grant future Brahmapada when Brahma himself has just earned it for his kalpa.

              It says by vara of Brahma, Hanumana will become shastra visharada in future like Brihaspati by grace of learning under Surya.

              Like this

              • Hariprasad Alur said:

                Parijat,

                Simple question:

                Without referring to any website can you quote one verse as proof?

                Like this

              • Krishna Kadiri said:

                Parijat asks this question – Are you & your cult from where you seem to draw misguided interpretations of shastra crazy.

                How can Brahma give/grant future Brahmapada when Brahma himself has just earned it for his kalpa.

                when the verses are told by sage agastya describing hanuman. Can anybody comprehend how many errors are there in his comprehension?

                Like this

      • Hariprasad Alur said:

        Parijat,

        In your [or is it from astrojyoti. To be clear] description of Krishna, what according to you is the meaning of TRIPURA & SARVADHIKA!!!!

        — Hariprasad

        Like this

        • Tri=3 i.e. all 14 loka. Sarvadhika means more than anybody born post Krishna.

          Like this

          • Hariprasad Alur said:

            Parijat,

            Can you please provide EVIDENCE for ” Sarvadhika means more than anybody born post Krishna”.

            — Hariprasad

            Like this

            • See Point 38.4.b. Unless somebody does tapa > 66000×3 years I doubt that there would be one to get vara of being sarvadhika bali in future from Shiva.

              Like this

            • “Valmiki Ramayan. Very first sarga…Bal kanda

              Valmiki wanted to know the story from Narad about that man who has all the 16 attributes. Narad says listen to what I heard from Bramha about that single person in the entire Three lokas and then goes on to recite the story of Rama to Valmiki.

              Etat icchami aham shrotum param kautuhalam hi me|
              Maharshe tvam samartho asi jnaatum evam vidham naram||

              Shrutva ch etat TRILOKAGNO valmikeh naarado vachah|
              Shruyataam iti ch amantrya praharishto vaakyam abravit||

              Here Valmiki is crystal clear. Only person in Triloka to have those attributes was RAM not SHIVA.”

              So you are admitting that:
              1. Rama is a Human(man)
              2. Rama can be described with attributes

              Shiva is nirguna hence is beyond(para) attributes. It also implies Shiva cannot be compared with anyone unlike Rama.

              Like this

              • Hariprasad Alur said:

                >> So you are admitting that:
                1. Rama is a Human(man)
                2. Rama can be described with attributes

                Just like I can describe you by attributes “a person with stupendulously fantabulistic nonsense oozing from all the pores” I can describe Ramachandra Prabhu as “Sarva deva namaskrutya, Rudrantargata, Sarva indriya preraka, anantaguna paripoorna, sakalaadhara, manamohana……….”

                Like this

          • Hariprasad Alur said:

            Parijat,

            >> Tri=3 i.e. all 14 loka

            Can you please segregate the 14 lokas in to 3 groups!!!

            — Hariprasad

            Like this

            • Yes, bhuloka/martyaloka, upper loka urdhvaloka & lower loka adholoka.

              Like this

              • Hariprasad Alur said:

                Parijat,

                Valmiki Ramayan. Very first sarga…Bal kanda

                Valmiki wanted to know the story from Narad about that man who has all the 16 attributes. Narad says listen to what I heard from Bramha about that single person in the entire Three lokas and then goes on to recite the story of Rama to Valmiki.

                Etat icchami aham shrotum param kautuhalam hi me|
                Maharshe tvam samartho asi jnaatum evam vidham naram||

                Shrutva ch etat TRILOKAGNO valmikeh naarado vachah|
                Shruyataam iti ch amantrya praharishto vaakyam abravit||

                Here Valmiki is crystal clear. Only person in Triloka to have those attributes was RAM not SHIVA.

                — Hariprasad

                Like this

          • Hariprasad Alur said:

            You are making best use of CTRL+C and CTRL+V

            jab duniya me sukh na pave chale chalo chale chalo

            Like this

    • “when SHIVA gives vara HARI and HARI BHAKTA HANUMAN can kill them …
      BUT when HARI protects his BHAKTA . even SHIVA ,DURVASa have to run to save their own life , STORY of AMBARISH ..”

      Durvasa runs as it is not a Brahmana’a dharma to attempt kill his host(Ambarisha). Durvasa attempts to give unproportionate/unjustified phala for Ambarisha’s fault. Shiva or Vishnu do not support/uphold a faulty person whoever he may be even Durvasa. Even an erring Brahmana like Durvasa is not supported. Shiva has given Sudarshana Chakra to Narayana to uphold dharma. Narayana is the carrier & chakra is the means/weapon. Ambarisha however is not perturbed by kritya created by Durvasa as he is not involved into bahya vishaya. In fact pious Ambarisha awaits Durvasa’s return for 1 year with jalahara alone then consumes anna. Whoever does wrong/adharma will get punished, that is the law & Durvasa is not above the law.

      Like this

      • BUT MATHUR , DURVASA is SHIVA himself ,

        In your own word YOU ACCEPT SHIVE I NOT ABOVE LAW .

        YES SHIVA IS BOUND BY LAWS SET BY NARAYANA ..

        see things have strated to comeout of your mouth
        HARI is ALONE MOKSHA giver , SHIVA is Bound by LAW , SHIVA is grandson .. SHIVA’s vara fail and can be overtaken by HANUMAN …SIva bHAKTAs have no answer to HARI’s anger . SHiva’s anger is always countered by HARI ..and also HARI BHAKTA hanuman ..
        SHIVa himself needs help of HARI … HARI gives vara to SHIVA he regulates shiva , HE is infinitely Greater than SHIVA .. ARVADHIKA you ahve accepted these in these debate , now where is your locus standii

        AND all these you HAVE accepted .. good progress

        Like this

  8. PARIJAAT quotes that this debate started with HANUMAN having overtaken vara of shiva we have not shown verses where such Vara has been granted and HANUMAAN overtakes it ..

    SO PARIJAAT here is verse ..
    when AKAMPAN is killed by HANUMAN .. AKAMPAN had SHIVA vara as being

    akamapanoapi rakshaso nishachareshchoditaH | UMAPATIrvaro addhataH kshanaddhato hanumata |
    even though akampana had immortality boon from UMAPATI he was killed in a second by HANUMAN

    second PARIJAAT says wherever ther is NARAYANA sarvottamatva is given it has always the word DEVA and thus means NARAYANA reference is only to devtas ..

    so here is the verse parijaat from MAHABHARATA which says there is none equal to NARAYANA nor in past or future .. which is inclusive of all .. there is no word deva here ..
    MAHABHARTA 1/1/16
    NASTI NARAYANA SAMAM N BHUTAM NA BHAVISHYATI ETENA SATYA VAAKYEN sarvaarthaan sadhyamyyaham ”

    Now from RAMAYANA too we come to know that RAMA is SARVOTTAMA ..

    AFTER using all the astras LAXMAN thought how to KIll INDRAJIT ..
    Then HE took an arrow and made sankalpa that “RAAMA is sarvottama ” and let this kill INDRAJIT ..and this arrow killed INDRAJIT .. that shows RAAMA is SARVOTTAMA .. which is TRUE ..

    Like this

    • PARIJAT opined BRAMHA vara could never be overtaken ..
      here is another quote where BRAMHA’s boons has been nullified ..

      RAVANA’s moolbala was 36 akshouhini sena …army .. this army had the boon of being always winner in war and immortality from BRAMHA the entire army died in RAMAYANA war

      verse ..
      varaadviranchasya parairajeyaam sarvairavadhyaam ch chamuum prayudhya | tarangiNitungatarangalolapalaanduvannasthirataam yayuste ||

      By the boon of virinchi bramha the army which could not be defeated by any or killed by any in war ..troubled vanar sena like a dry onion caught in the ferocious flow of ocean water ..

      but even this army was destroyed ..
      mahabalena RAmena shrutva MOOLBALAM hatam | jevitaashaam sukhaashaam ch kshanaat tatyajya ravan |
      seeing this detruction of his core strength army .. RAVAN for a second left hope on his life and happiness ..

      Like this

      • You have attempted to insult Shiva. Now you also dare to attempt insult Brahma. Your dvesha of anyone apart from Narayana knows no bounds.

        “By the boon of virinchi bramha the army which could not be defeated by any or killed by any in war ..troubled vanar sena like a dry onion caught in the ferocious flow of ocean water ..”

        You are answering your own doubts here, yet you do not know it! Why, because you keep holding to self denial.

        See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denial for psychiatric help.

        Who is an army identified with. Its King. Ravana’s army is recognized as sarvairavadhya because Ravana has nearabout(not counting Humans) such a vara from Brahma.

        Like this

        • Now that your attention is drawn to Humans, I will show you impotency of Rama.

          We know Ikshvakukulavanshi Anaranya ancestor of Rama & ruler of Ayodhya was defeated by Ravana.

          We know Vali had defeated Ravana in a play & made Ravana laughing stock => Vali >> Ravana. So had Kartvirya Arjuna son of Kritavirya => Kartvirya >> Ravana. We also know that another Human candidate, King Marutta could not fight Ravana as he was deekshita in yagya.

          We all know how much effort it took Rama to finally defeat Ravana => Vali > Rama & Kartvirya > Rama.

          Like this

          • Viju Rao said:

            parijat,
            i dont understand why u qoute from only a single source…its really sad u’ve learnt nothing from a week of intense discussion…we all have told u that all details of even a single incident is not given in single work..they are scattered in puranas…so get all the facts first then ques of right or wrong facts!!! ur above post shows half knowledge again as usual…
            1. kartivrya arjun defeated ravana…why? coz he had boon by dattatraya rupi hari…
            2. vali was himself a great ram bhakta..u dont that? now why would someone superior to rama be bhakta of him???
            3. it took no effort for rama at all to kill anyone..ravana fell unconscious for 48 min by just first attack of rama…it was pulastya who begged rama to give him one more chance else ravan would have died after few min if wasnt revived by rama himself by aditya hrudayam…
            4.vali was killed by rama not by any deceit or cheating…there r reasons for it…discussion on it has taken place in this blog..refer to it

            Like this

            • “i dont understand why u qoute from only a single source…”

              I have only cited Itihasa(Valmiki Ramayana+Vyasa Mahabharata) & only Bhagvata Purana in all my discussion of more than 40 points so far.

              I must now pause to ask if your cult believes in Bhagvata Purana or not?

              Like this

          • @ Parijat Mathur – you are another fortunate one by landing yourself on this blog, but yet unfortunate like few others because of being ignorant and lacking to the ability to understand/grasp what a genuine Brahmin is teaching. On top of that you still show disrespect with poor knowledge and arguments, please have some shame.

            How dare you write “I will show you impotency of Rama” – you are not capable of showing anything great if you don’t realise who God is.

            Wikipedia cannot be considered reliable – anyone can go in and make changes.

            Now as wiki is one of the sources you seem to follow and believe – I will show you few links from there – so learn a few basics before you enter debates or give opinions.

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Anarchism_referencing_guidelines
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reliability_of_Wikipedia
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Why_Wikipedia_is_not_so_great

            Like this

            • “genuine Brahmin”

              Brahmana is one who knows Brahm not just a self proclaimed one.

              A (true)brahmana has dvesha of nobody neither Shiva nor Durga nor Krishna nor Brahma & sees samata in all.

              Like this

              • I think your logic and arguments are very poor. Also when writing please try to re-call what your parents and teachers have taught you – as in some basic manners, values and principles.

                You are under estimating Guru Chiraan – he can read your past, present and future and your lucky he hasnt and doesn’t shame you – that’s a sign of a genuine Brahmin.

                Simple questions and expect simple answers
                Do you believe in God?
                If so, who do you consider to be God?

                *If you believe different from Lord Vishnu as God and after over 1 weeks of debating you haven’t learnt then I think you will never learn, also if you are not willing to learn why waste time here debating, especially with no real refs that cant be deemed as genuine.

                Like this

            • “fortunate one by landing yourself on this blog”

              They say fortune favors the bold.

              Like this

              • And precisely who is “they”? you seem to believe everything “they” say apart from where things are backed up.

                Like this

            • “You are under estimating Guru Chiraan – he can read your past, present and future ”

              I doubt highly that a person as deluded & Shiva/Brahma/… dveshi like your “Guru Chiraan” can have trikaladarshi yoga in his kundli.

              Like this

              • “And precisely who is “they”? you seem to believe everything “they” say apart from where things are backed up.”

                Daiva favors the purusharthi. “They” are our ancestors, our rishi-muni-sadhu-…

                “things are backed up.”

                Read my posts Points1-44, all are backed by citations to verses/adhyayas/sargas/parvas/kandas from Itihasa & Vyasa Bhagvata Purana unlike your unsubstantiated posts based on supposedly svarga loka editions of shastra.

                Like this

              • So you only answer back to statements/questions that you feel like.
                The more someone says to your improve your knowledge and manners the worse it gets – Your contribution and posts are not deemed fit enough for this blog.

                Can you prove your high doubts that “Guru Chiraan” can have trikaladarshi yoga in his kundli”? if not then dont make such statements.

                You are an embarassment to Hindu`s by spreading crap about your own religion.
                The simple asks are as follows:
                -If you have any shame left then stop the posts that have no substance.
                -If you have finished saying what you wanted then whats stopping you from leaving this blog?
                -If you are not willing to leave the blog then like a normal mature man provide a break down of points you want to debate – you and Guru Chiraan can go through one by one and conclude – rest are welcome to make comments or observe. – rules are write professionally without being rude and provide your source of information.

                Like this

              • Parijat Mathur “Read my posts Points1-44, all are backed by citations to verses/adhyayas/sargas/parvas/kandas from Itihasa & Vyasa Bhagvata Purana unlike your unsubstantiated posts based on supposedly svarga loka editions of shastra”

                Sonu – I can see you have used Wikipedia and proven to you its not genuine. I can also see you have used http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/mbs/mbs01002.htm – this is also not genuine. If you wish to resume the debate then prepare well for it.

                Like this

          • Krishnan said:

            What are you trying to prove here, Mr. Mathur?

            “Impotency of Rama” – How can you even use words like that?

            When Shiva himself is always in dhyana of Rama (read Adhyatma Ramayana from Padma Purana to understand how much Shiva worships Rama).

            Please go to a Sadguru, learn the shastra and come back to debate.

            Like this

            • “Impotency of Rama” – How can you even use words like that?

              The same way Ravana is impotent against Vali & Kartvirya.

              Like this

              • BTW literal meaning of impotent is not having protential(capability).

                Like this

              • Typo: Replace protential with potential

                Like this

              • Krishnan said:

                There is a shloka in sundara kanda of Valmiki which is as follows:

                Sarvaan Lokaan Susamhritya Sa bhootaan Sa charaacharaan
                Punareva tathaa srashtum shakto Ramo Mahaayashaaha

                The meaning of the above shloka is that Rama is capable of destroying “ALL” worlds including the sentient and the insentients in it. Not only that, He can recreate all these worlds.

                And, now here, you are talking about the “potentiality” of Rama, Rama whose lotus feet is always worshipped by Shiva as said by Shiva himself.

                My suggestion to you still holds good: Please go to a sadguru, learn shastra and then come back to debate.

                Like this

              • Hariprasad Alur said:

                Parajit,

                You are right. Thanks for understanding this…. atleast now.

                Take a deep breath and read calmly what I have written below.

                RAM HAS NO CAPABILITY OF DOING ANYTHING AGAINST DHARMA.

                For having taken up so much blog space you are required to write the above line 1008 times.

                Regards
                Hari

                Like this

              • Hariprasad Alur said:

                Typo: Read PARAJIT as PARIJAT

                Like this

              • @Hariprasad A ji

                It guess it was a happy typo sir, surely Parijat is losing his ground of debate and will become Parajit after a while. :D

                Like this

              • Krishna Kadiri said:

                Parijat said he will show impotency of Rama… has anybody seen any evidence to that? I only see evidence of Parijat’s impotency… (i mean, not having potential to have a evidence based debate :) )

                Like this

            • 45. “When Shiva himself is always in dhyana of Rama (read Adhyatma Ramayana from Padma Purana to understand how much Shiva worships Rama).”

              I have read enough of our shastra to appreciate the beauty of our ancestor rishi-muni-sadhyu-… kavyas. BTW I must pause to know your cult’s stance on Shiva. What I could gather from your previous posts, you consider Shiva to be jeeva which you then interpret as maransheela/mortal.

              45.1. If Shiva is mortal, how he not die after consuming halahal visha?
              45.2. If Shiva is mortal, how come he is seen post Baalmukunda darshana by Markandeya?[See Point 38.5, 38.6, 38.10]
              45.3. If Shiva is mortal how Markandeya receives vara of Ajara-Amaratva from Shiva?
              [See Point 38.5, 38.6, 38.10]

              Like this

              • brigga223 said:

                There is a difference between being a jeeva and being a mortal. Both are not the same. The atma/ soul is immortal. The body that one is born in, is mortal. Here Jeeva is in the sense that the bodies of devatas other than Vishnu have been “created” from another source. The ultimate source from which the body of Brahma sprang is Sri Maha Vishnu. This body of devatas(jeevas) are “Kshara” meaning “perishable”. Only Vishnu is unborn so he is not a jeeva. At the time of Pralaya, the bodies of these devatas(jeevas) are destroyed except for Lakshmi whose body is “Akshara” (imperishable).

                Just know the correct meaning of “jeeva” before jumping to conclusions.

                Like this

            • “There is a shloka in sundara kanda of Valmiki which is as follows:

              Sarvaan Lokaan Susamhritya Sa bhootaan Sa charaacharaan
              Punareva tathaa srashtum shakto Ramo Mahaayashaaha”

              Would you be kind enough to provide sarga/verse no.

              Like this

              • Krishnan said:

                Absolutely, here it is:

                http://www.valmikiramayan.net/sundara/sarga51/sundara_51_frame.htm

                Sundarakanda, Sarga 51 and Shloka 39

                Like this

              • Krishnan said:

                There is another verse in the same sarga (Sundarakanda, Sarga 51, verse 45) which further proves superiority of Rama over Brahma and Shiva:

                brahma svayamubhuushcha turaanano vaa |
                rudrastriNetrastripuraantako vaa |
                indro mahendraH suranaayako vaa |
                traatum na shaktaa yudhi raamavadhyam

                The meaning of the above verse is:

                “Either Brahma or Rudra can’t protect the one who Rama decides to kill”

                Now, if Rama is just a manushya, why is Hanuman saying the above verses?

                Like this

          • 1) “Sri RAma RAma RAmeti,Rame Raame Manorame,Sahasra NAma Tat Tulyam,RAma NAma VarAnane.”
            Lord Shiva addressed Devi PArvati: “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 (Vishnu-sahasra-nama-stotram).”

            2) Did Ganga not originate from Vishnu paada? Is Shiva not Gangadhara ?

            Like this

            • Stick to topic at hand- Ramayana/Mahabharata characters supposedly countering vara of Shiva(or even Brahma). Shastra are infinite & addressing all your doubts is likely to require multitudes of lifetimes.

              Like this

          • //Now that your attention is drawn to Humans, I will show you impotency of Rama.//

            Your naked demonstration mehalomania,is a classic example of what “little knowledge” can wrought on an unworthy but over-ambitious person…no further comments are necessary…proving the famous saying little knowledge is dangerous…especially,the haughtiness it breeds…and by the way…you have “disproved” nothing… of any consequence…! !
            I feel sad for you….and shall pray for you…
            All the forum members., wish you the very best…
            Thats why in Vayu stuti Sri Trivikrama Pt Acharya has written what will happen for people like you…
            Amagnan Andha kupe Kshura muka makarai pakshi…

            Like this

            • Sanjay .. anandaan mandamandaan for you .. Your posts were very informative and mature

              Like this

              • Hare Srinivasa Guru ji,
                I am humbled by your kind words of appreciation! Let your blessings be on me ALWAYS! and i keep seeking knowledge from you and other stalwarts through this wonderful medium created by you!
                Srinivasa Smarane

                Like this

            • “mehalomania”

              You just invented a word.

              “I feel sad for you….and shall pray for you…”

              Thankyou for the warm heartedness but I rather believe that one gets what one deserves & there should be no escape from that.

              Like this

              • @Mathur Oh,So you are aware of your exact mental condition..that helps us..Please take a note of this Guru ji..

                Like this

              • Aha ab jaake raai phooti mr mathur !!! :D chalo ek ye baat bikul sahii kaha hai tumne… har ek jeeva ka swagati pehle se hii, ardhaarth anaadi kaal se hii nishchit hota hai…. aur usko wohi dasha milti hai jiski usko yogyata hai, na kam na adhik…. ( ab main hindi mein bol rahii hun toh christian nahi lag rahii hun na… ;) ) ab bhai, Shri Hari tumhe bachaayenge na nahi ye toh wohi jaanein…. kyon ki unka aakeshep karne waale ko Yamaraaja nahi chodte… Ye rahe Shrimad Bhagavatam 6.3.29 se uplabdh svayam Yamadharmaraja ke muh se nikle hue shabd….

                jihvā na vakti bhagavad-guṇa-nāmadheyaḿ
                cetaś ca na smarati tac-caraṇāravindam
                kṛṣṇāya no namati yac-chira ekadāpi
                tān ānayadhvam asato ‘kṛta-viṣṇu-kṛtyān

                Yamaraja apne kinkaron ko bataa rahe hain ki, jo log Shri Hari ne guna-gaan nahi karte, jo hriday mein unka smaran nahi karte, jo ek baar bhii unke charanon mein sheesh jhukaake pranaam nahi karte, jo unke prati kartavya nahi nibhaate, unn sab naraadhamon ko narak mein leke aao.

                Like this

      • Ravana attacked Svarga, Indra asks Vishnu for help but Vishnu refuses stating that Ravana is unkillable by devasura.

        See Verse6-18/Sarga27/Uttara kanda/Valmiki Ramayana here:
        http://valmiki.iitk.ac.in/index.php?id=sloka1 [IIT Kanpur website]

        This implies two things
        1. Brahma vara cannot be countered even by Vishnu [Verse18]
        2. Vishnu himself is just a deva [Verse15]

        Like this

        • THEN why DID INDRA NOT RUN TO SHIVA .. if HE was not deva ..was INDRA ignorant of the fact that SHIAVAITES see to know ..AFTER ALL it was vara from BRAMHA which VISHNU chose to honour .. THEN SHIVA SHOULD HAVE BEEN ASKED TO TACKLE RAVANA .. BUT INDRA DID NOT DO because INDRA KNEW SHIVA could never overcome BRAMHA VARA ..as he is lower diety than BRAMHA ..

          HANUMAN a VISHNU BHAKTA if he could counter BRAMHA VARA .. ie if SHISHYA CAN COUNTER It goes without mnetion that GURU ,master can automatically do it ..

          there are many verses shown in valimiki RAMAYANA itself that RAMA is ALl powerful GOD ..

          Like this

          • Regrding your misconception UNKILLABLE by DEVASURA … let me show you fcat where even a DEVA could have killed RAVANA ..
            RAVAN fights with YAMA ..angered YAMA [ a devata ] is instigated to USE YAMAPASHA …on RAVANA .. BRAMHA APPEARS before YAMA and asks YAMA to refrain from USING YAMA DANDA becuase as BRAMHa has given VARA to YAMA saying his use of YAMApasha will never go futile .. its use will invariably kill RAVAN … But then it will falsify the VARA given to RAVANA …. that he cannot be killed by DEVA ..

            but if YAMA uses it will KIll RAVANA irrespective of RAVANA had vara or not ..

            AS RAVANA is bad boy .. YAMA is good boy , tecaher is asking a good boy to refrain ..as ravana would not listen being rakshasha nd keep the sancitity of VARA ..

            IF your missconception were true about DEVA not being able to kill .. then BRAMh’s ineterference would not have been necessaru YAMa would have used and nothing shoudl have happned to RAVANA ..

            BEcause RAVAN would have died BRAMHA persuades YAMA to refrain from usin YAMA DANDA .. [ in case you do not know YAMA danda is one which when put on the body soul departs without resistance ..., RAVANA AFTER DEATH had to be taken by this danda only ... ]

            Like this

            • Before answering may I ask if you have actually not understood import of Ravana-Yama encounter or you merely want to use your understanding/interpretation for debate.

              Like this

              • Interpreting your silence as indicative of your confused state, here is actually what transpired between Yama & Brahma:

                See Sarga22/Uttara kanda/Valmiki Ramayana here:
                http://valmiki.iitk.ac.in/index.php?id=sloka1

                Reason yama does not use kaaldanda is that Brahma’s pleasure gives vara(kaaldanda) & his displeasure can undo vara & even shapa can follow.
                Brahma himself protects Ravana to ensure his vara to Ravana bears true.
                Yamadanda is offensive vara, Ravana vara is defensive vara(like a kavacha).
                A kavacha has to be 1st taken off then offensive astra can be effective.
                Brahma says if kaaldanda is used it will destroy all prani/srishti without any discrimination. [Verse 43]
                Brahma says his word will be proven wrong if ravana did not die or did die using kaaldanda.[Verse 45]
                Yama realizes that brahma himself is protecting Ravana that Ravana is avadhya(by deva) due to vara so understands his futility in opposing Ravana so Yama antardhana to escape possible humiliation & capture by Ravana.[Verse 48-49]

                Like this

            • “So shiv is grandson OF NARAYANA is proved where is the ground for further discussion ….

              when SHIVA gives vara HARI and HARI BHAKTA HANUMAN can kill them …
              BUT when HARI protects his BHAKTA . even SHIVA ,DURVASa have to run to save their own life , STORY of AMBARAISH ..

              STORY OF DURVASA running away thinking BHEEMA will punish when unable to consume food with full stomach ..in MAHABHARTA ..
              DURVASA is AFRAID OF BHEEMA the avatra of VAYU

              BHEEMASEN , captures ashwatthama ,tonsures and and sets him free only to run away into jungle insulted ..

              ASHWATHTHAMA the avatara of SHIVA , is captured and shaved .. DOES SHIVA NOT DO ANYTHING WHY ? because he is not capable of countering BHEEMA

              ASHWATHATHAMA is defeated in MAHABHARAT war by BHEEMSEN ARJUN ..why ?”

              Do you want to be educated or are you merely attempting to debate here now that you have been unable to show your allegation of any Shiva vara being countered by Ramayana/Mahabaharata characters.

              Like this

              • @Parijat

                > you have been unable to show your allegation of any Shiva vara being countered by Ramayana/Mahabaharata characters >

                You say the above when Guruji very clearly explained umpteen times, and in CAPITALS that

                “when SHIVA gives vara HARI and HARI BHAKTA HANUMAN can kill them …
                BUT when HARI protects his BHAKTA . even SHIVA ,DURVASa have to run to save their own life , STORY of AMBARISH ..”

                It’s proven beyond doubt that you see only what you want to see. There’s no place for someone like you here. Now without further ado, buzz off when told politely.

                Like this

              • sanjaytavargeri said:

                @Mathur,
                Here you go…
                shaivapurANa like skanda, whatever Shiva has told to Skanda .

                He then quotes PadmapurANa which says:
                paramo vishhNurevaikastajj~nAnaM moxasAdhanam.h |
                shAstrANAM nirNayastveshha tadanyanmohanAya hi ||
                j~nAnaM vinA tu yA muktiH sAmyaM cha mama vishhNunA |
                tIrthA.adimAtrato j~nAnaM mamA.adhikyaM cha vishhNutaH ||
                abhedashchAsmadAdInAM muktAnAM hariNA tathA |
                ityAdi sarvaM mohAya kathyate putra nAnyathA ||

                These are Shiva’s words to his son, where he says: Only Vishnu alone is the supreme most, and this knowledge is the means to get mokSha. This indeed is the purport of all sadAgamas and all other texts / sections are meant for delusion. In fact, all these percepts – that one can get mokSha without jnaana, or equality of Vishnu and Shiva, or that one can get jnaana just by doing karma, or that I am greater to Vishnu, or that we all are identical, or that all muktas are identical to Vishnu – all these are meant for delusion, dear, and not for telling the truth.

                Like this

              • Murali said:

                Mathur….that’s again plain crap man!!!!!!

                ///////Reason yama does not use kaaldanda is that Brahma’s pleasure gives vara(kaaldanda) & his displeasure can undo vara & even

                shapa can follow.//////

                Reallllyyyy???? So, Brahma will be angry on Yama for using his Kaaldand on an adharmic, but Brahma will not be angry on adharmic

                Ravan for raging war against the embodiment of Dharma itself…. is it ???… what a CRAP!!!!!

                If Brahma were to undo his varas and give shapas all over the place, then all Daityas would have been given shapas for their

                misuse of varas and their varas would have been nullified…..

                ///////A kavacha has to be 1st taken off then offensive astra can be effective.////////

                Again Realllyyyyyyyyy?? So why did Brahma get doubt that his word will be proven wrong if Yama uses Kaaldand and kills Ravan? He

                hasn’t taken away his kavacha from Ravan yet right!!!!!!?????

                First read what Guru ji has written carefully….. CAREFULLY bro!!!!

                And simple fact you are missing…. Yama is also a bhaktha of Brahma which is why he got vara from Brahma…. why would he not

                protect Yama and why would he protect only Ravan… that sounds rubbish… Shows how mean you think of Brahma… that he would

                protect an adharmic bhaktha and not a dharmic bhaktha….

                Like this

              • Murali said:

                Mathur!

                You said ///////Reason yama does not use kaaldanda is that Brahma’s pleasure gives vara(kaaldanda) & his displeasure can undo vara & even shapa can follow.//////

                So, Brahma will be angry on Yama for using his Kaaldand on an adharmic, but Brahma will not be angry on adharmic Ravan for raging war against the embodiment of Dharma itself…. is it ???… what a CRAP!!!!!

                If Brahma were to undo his varas and give shapas all the time, then all Daityas would have been given shapas for their misuse of varas and their varas would have been nullified…..

                ///////A kavacha has to be 1st taken off then offensive astra can be effective.////////

                Really?? So why did Brahma get doubt that his word will be proven wrong if Yama uses Kaaldand and kills Ravan? He hasn’t taken away his kavacha from Ravan yet right!!!!!!?????
                First read what Guru ji has written carefully….. CAREFULLY bro!!!!

                And simple fact you are missing…. Yama is also a bhaktha of Brahma which is why he got vara from Brahma…. why would he not protect Yama and why would he protect only Ravan… it sounds rubbish… that BRAHMA would protect an adharmic bhaktha and not a dharmic bhaktha.

                Murali

                Like this

              • mathur thinks kaaldanda destroys whole world .. if used on RAVANA …
                this is again a misinformation , danda takes away life of the person [ without doubt ] when used whomsoever it is used on that is bRAHMA vara ..

                Like this

              • MATHUR has not quoted a single verse till date .. he harps on his own interpetation of words [ which are way out of logic and grammar , where even a layman can see that it is illogical ] and yet thinks he has given a great logic …

                neither does MATHUR denate by giving answer to the questions raised , he conveniently ignores the criticla question and hops onto new topic with new garbage …

                MATHUR is unaware that KM GANGULY is only version on mahbharta on net ,.. his opinion that whosover has uploaed this version borrowing it from freely avaialable data at various sites , is actually the creator of the content .. while it has been amply proved and demonstarted with links and statistics and proofs and quotes that only version available on net is one tranliterated as project outsider only … without this knwoledge if mathur again and again proudly says astrojyoti is my source and is authentic .. it is futile ..

                even after showing umpteen verses if same question are reqrganised saying no one has answered is .. like cat drinking milk with closed eyes ..

                so many stalwarts on this forum have given so many verses from valmiki ramayana , mahabharata .. and amply proved VISHNU SARVITTAMATVA ,,
                recent debacle of MATHUR is he shows a verse which does not at all talk about UNBORN SHIVA .. yet he goes on harping the verse says .. ajaikpada .. etc etc and nowhere remotely UNBORN … and yet he feels he is debating ..when one does not even have basic knwoledge of whether he is speakings ense or not and upon that acuses others who have amply demonstrated logic .. it is only unfortunate that debate is directionless .. with illogical connotation from half brianed

                Like this

            • “KINDLY GIVE one pramaana from veda where it is said SHIVA is unborn …”
              ” WE ARE YET TO SEE single verse from YOU”.

              What do you doubt here- my ability to give this pramana or you doubt existence of these verses themselves?? Have clarity in your demands.

              Open up your dark heart to Adhyaya8/Aashvamedhika parva/Vyasa Mahabharata here:
              http://www.astrojyoti.com/pdfs/DevanagariFiles/mahabharata14_ashvamedhika.pdf

              Verse1 Angiranandana Sanvarta calls Shiva Bhagvana
              Verse 8 Sanvarta says no prani can see Shiva using prakrita lochana
              Verse 20 Sanvarta calls Shiva Aja
              Verse 19 pati(lord)
              Verse 21 ananga(formless)
              Verse 23 anagha(pure)
              Verse 25 avyaya(one who does not change/avinashi)
              Verse 27 bhava(the source)
              Verse 27 vishvarupam(who is manifested as vishva)

              Like this

        • I think you need basic education regarding deva. Indra is elder brother of Vishnu. It is natural for Indra to seek Vishnu’s help in matters regarding his impotency then. Shiva does not discriminate amongst deva/asura/… unless there be adharma committed by either party.

          Do you disagree with Parts1&2 proposed here:

          Ravana attacked Svarga, Indra asks Vishnu for help but Vishnu refuses stating that Ravana is unkillable by devasura.
          See Verse6-18/Sarga27/Uttara kanda/Valmiki Ramayana here:
          http://valmiki.iitk.ac.in/index.php?id=sloka1 [IIT Kanpur website]
          This implies two things
          1. Brahma vara cannot be countered even by Vishnu [Verse18]
          2. Vishnu himself is just a deva [Verse15]

          Part1[Verse 18]- word used by Vishnu is “durlabha kamo” => means difficult to achieve hatya of Ravana by Vishnu.

          Verse17 indra addresses vishnu as “sureshvara” which supports import of Verse 18 that Vishnu is just a deva [Point 2].

          Like this

          • ” Indra is elder brother of Vishnu. ” :D … PARIJAT PURAN MEIN AAJ EK NAYA ADHYAYA JUDA .. :D ..

            Like this

          • Viju Rao said:

            parijat,,
            seeking help is different is from getting the job done in totality…vamana did all the work indra did nothing in vanquishing gbali maharaja…if ravana couldnt be killed by deva and asuras then how come rama killed him..as according to u rama is deva only..??

            Like this

            • This is silly. Have you guys even read Valmiki Ramayana? Rama is not Deva(=child of Aditi), Rama is Manushya(descendant of Manu, Manu & Rama are our ancestors).

              See Sarga 10/Uttara Kanda/Valmiki Ramayana here:
              http://valmiki.iitk.ac.in/index.php?id=sloka1

              Verse17: Ravana asks Brahma for sarvaamaratva he does not ask for just amartava. Sarva is used explicitly to show by all.

              Verse 19: Ravana then is forced to choose limited amartva- Brahma grants him as per his wish to not be killable at hands of Suparna(golden winged) means Garuda, Naga, Yaksha, Daitya, Danava, Rakshasa & Deva.

              Verse 20: Ravana knowing Humans to be impotent & maransheela, is overconfident to not ask protection from Humans.

              Like this

          • Krishnan said:

            I can also show you verses from the same Bhagavata Purana that Shiva is the grandson of Hari. Now, as per your logic, what will that make Shiva?

            Like this

            • Welcome, do show. Your intention of misinterpreting Narayana-Brahma-Rudra is not unknown to me.

              Like this

              • Krishnan said:

                Shrimad Bhagavatam 2.4.25

                etad evātma-bhū rājan
                nāradāya vipṛcchate
                veda-garbho ‘bhyadhāt sākṣād
                yad āha harir ātmanaḥ

                where Brahma is referred to as the son of Hari

                Shrimad Bhagavatam 3.12.6 to 3.12.12

                These verses talk about how Rudra was born from Brahma. Specifically, the verse

                manyur manur mahinaso
                mahāñ chiva ṛtadhvajaḥ
                ugraretā bhavaḥ kālo
                vāmadevo dhṛtavrataḥ

                where Brahma mentions 11 names of Rudra (Shiva included)

                These unequivocally show that Shiva is the grandson of Vishnu.

                Shri Bhavishyottara Purana, 11th Chapter

                Brahma Uvacha:

                Kimartham Mohayasi No Mayaa panjaravaasinaha
                Kopi Naasteeti Yathproktam tadasatyam chaturbhuja
                Putroham tava kalyana, Poutrah saakshaat trilochanaha
                Manmathonyah pumaan putrah Poutraputrah shadaananah
                Jagatpraano Jyesthaputrah snushaa the bharati hare

                In the above verses, Chaturmukha Brahma is saying:

                “Lord, I am your son. Trilochana (Shiva) is your grandson. Manmatha is another son of yours and Skanda is your great grandson. Vayu is your elder son and Bharati is your daughter-in-law

                Now, please show these verses to anyone and ask who is misinterpreting.

                Like this

              • So shiv is grandson OF NARAYANA is proved where is the ground for further discussion ….

                when SHIVA gives vara HARI and HARI BHAKTA HANUMAN can kill them …
                BUT when HARI protects his BHAKTA . even SHIVA ,DURVASa have to run to save their own life , STORY of AMBARAISH ..

                STORY OF DURVASA running away thinking BHEEMA will punish when unable to consume food with full stomach ..in MAHABHARTA ..
                DURVASA is AFRAID OF BHEEMA the avatra of VAYU

                BHEEMASEN , captures ashwatthama ,tonsures and and sets him free only to run away into jungle insulted ..

                ASHWATHTHAMA the avatara of SHIVA , is captured and shaved .. DOES SHIVA NOT DO ANYTHING WHY ? because he is not capable of countering BHEEMA

                ASHWATHATHAMA is defeated in MAHABHARAT war by BHEEMSEN ARJUN ..why ?

                Like this

              • Krishnan said:

                What do you have to say about these verses that clearly prove (without a trace of doubt) that Shiva is the grandson of Vishnu?

                Like this

              • Krishna Kadiri said:

                Parijat wrote – Welcome, do show. Your intention of misinterpreting Narayana-Brahma-Rudra is not unknown to me.

                Why bhagavata, even the Mahabharata refers to rudra as brahma’s son. Multiple references throughout, but shantiparva has it again. The same Narayana rishi (yama’s son) will now fight rudra himself… brahma comes, stops rudra from fighting and says that I was born from Narayana, and you were born from me…

                another incident: Rudra goes to Brahma to get his doubts clarified! Brahma asks him – dear son, how are your studies and tapas going on? You indeed perform severe tapas always..

                kaccit te kushalaM putra svAdhyAyatapasoH sadA
                nityam ugratapAs tvaM hi tataH pRcchAmi te punaH

                Rudra replies -
                rudra uvAca
                tvatprasAdena bhagavan svAdhyAyatapasor mama
                kushalaM cAvyayaM caiva sarvasya jagatas tathA

                by your grace, my study and tapas are doing find… he then asks –
                ko hi asau cintyate brahma tvayA vai puruSottamaH – whom do you meditate upon? (That is, in what form of the Lord do you meditate upon)?

                Brahma gives a long answer –

                shRNu putra yathA hy eSa puruSaH shAshvato.avyayaH

                dear son, listen to what i say about that eternal, immutable Purusha..

                sa hi nArAyaNo jneyaH sarvAtmA puruSo hi saH
                He indeed is the Narayana, who is to be known as the Controller of all, and He indeed is the real Purusha.
                ..
                ahaM brahmA Adya IshaH prajAnAM; tasmAjjAtas tvaM ca mattaH prasUtaH

                I, Brahma, am the controlloer of all beings, and am born of Him. And you are born from me..

                Shanti parva 338 adhyaya (BORI edition).

                Like this

          • harshala said:

            ROFL !!
            Indra is elder Brother of Vishnu !!!

            What Cult are you BROTHER ?

            Like this

          • Krishna Kadiri said:

            Parijat said – I think you need basic education regarding deva. Indra is elder brother of Vishnu.

            -
            Indra is elder brother of Vamana / Upendra, an avataara of Vishnu. Indra’s mother aditi seeks a boon from Vishnu that he should become her son. Vishnu grants that and this happens during vaamanavataara where Vishnu *manifests* as kashyapa’s son. This is told in ‘n’ places including harivamsha. Let me know if you need references :)

            But to say that Indra is elder brother of Vishnu is to mix up stuff madly.

            Btw, during parijaat-apaharaN (not your apaharan, but the divine tree), Rudra comes to fight Krishna. What happens? Garuda kicks and throws Rudra and Nandi in one shot…

            bhagavata, 10th skandha, 66th adhyaya (in the vaishnava rescension).

            tUrNaM gR^ihItvA pANibhyAM viShANe tasya nandinaH |
            **sashUlapANiM chixepa** vainateyo dhanushshate ||

            Rudra demonstrates, again and again, that he is subservient to Vishnu. Many times intentionally; sometimes forced due to asuraavesha..

            Like this

          • Raghav said:

            “Indra is elder brother of Vishnu.” Cant stop laughing….lol…its shows ur ignorance.

            Like this

        • Hariprasad said:

          Mr Vishnu Dweshi,

          How conveniently you quote selectively! From your same valmiki ramayana source, uttara kanda, sarga 27, can you look at shlokas 19 and 20? Let me post translation for you over here..

          “O Lord Indra, I do declare in your presence that I shall be the cause of the death of this rakshasa at the appropriate time. When I see that the time has arrived, I shall kill Ravana, along with those who march before him, thus giving pleasure to the gods”

          Now, what is your next excuse?

          - Hariprasad

          Like this

          • “Mr Vishnu Dweshi” ‘s dveshi,

            Your ref. of succeeding verses only strengthens my point.

            With your verse ref. it is clear that Vishnu is incapable of killing Ravana, he fears for his reputation as being regarded as one who always kills his enemy when participating in war which is “durlabha kamo” when it comes to Ravana, he has to wait till birth as Manushya. Indra is ashrayaheena & now has to face Ravana by himself.

            Like this

            • Hariprasad said:

              Mr VD,

              I pity your ability to interpret Sanskrit. Lord Vishnu clearly says he will not retreat without killing the enemy if he enters battle, so he will not enter the battle. Clearly, if he enters, he will be overriding the boon and will kill him.

              Vishnu does not say he cannot fight or defeat Ravana. He says he chooses not to enter battle. Only reason – keep the boon given by Brahma.

              I must confess – and be honest here. My only intention is to find out the truth – nothing else Mr Parijat. Only after the truth. Please tell me if you are (1) an ignorant fool or (2) a shameless liar.

              Going by the way you blatantly ignore glaring facts, (2) is a better title for you.

              Like this

              • Hariprasad Alur said:

                2>1

                Like this

              • What then is “durlabha kamo” for Vishnu then?? Have you even read authentic Valmiki Ramayana, or are you brainwashed into cultism.

                Like this

              • Hariprasad said:

                Mr VD,

                Do you know the meaning of “Durlabha”? What makes you think it is “impossible”? Do you know why it is “durlabha” for Vishnu? Only one reason – cos it will have to come at the expense of disregarding Brahma’s vara.

                And why the combination “durlabha kamah” has been used? Who is asking the favor? Indra. Whose boon has to be overridden? Brahma. Who is higher amongst Brahma and Indra? Brahma. So what is the way out? Kill Ravana but still honor vara. How? By taking birth as human.

                Also, verses 6 to 18 contain a great stuti of Vishnu by Indra. Have you even gone through it?

                The shlokas you have posted (selectively) are the clearest indication of Vishnu’s sarvottamatva, and of his intention to honor Brahma’s vara.

                Hariprasad.

                Like this

              • “Also, verses 6 to 18 contain a great stuti of Vishnu by Indra. Have you even gone through it?”

                You must be really naive to think one who posts verses has not read the sarga they belong to.
                See:

                “2. Vishnu himself is just a deva [Verse15]

                [Verse17] Indra addresses Vishnu as “sureshvara” which supports import of Verse 18 that Vishnu is just a deva [Point 2].”

                Like this

        • Krishna Kadiri said:

          Parijat said – Ravana attacked Svarga, Indra asks Vishnu for help but Vishnu refuses stating that Ravana is unkillable by devasura.

          See Verse6-18/Sarga27/Uttara kanda/Valmiki Ramayana here:
          http://valmiki.iitk.ac.in/index.php?id=sloka1 [IIT Kanpur website]

          This implies two things
          1. Brahma vara cannot be countered even by Vishnu [Verse18]
          2. Vishnu himself is just a deva [Verse15]

          Parijat either reads partially or is a cheat. The verses clarify the following –

          bravIShi yattu mAm shakra samyuge yotsyasIti ha .
          naivAhaM pratiyotsye tam rAvaNaM rAkShasAdhipam .. 16..\\
          anihatya ripum viShNurna hi pratinivartate .
          durlabhashchaiSha kAmo.adya varamAsAdya rAkShase .. 17..\\
          pratijAnAmi devendra tvatsamIpam shatakrato .
          rAkShasasyAhamevAsya bhavitA mR^ityukAraNam .. 18..\\
          ahamenam vadhiShyAmi rAvaNaM sasutaM yudhi .

          Where Narayana tells that I will not fight him now; Vishnu never returns from a fight without killing his enemy… and later asserts that He himself will become the reason for Ravana’s death and will kill Ravana and his son in a war.

          Like this

    • “UMAPATIrvaro addhataH kshanaddhato hanumata”

      And what clarity of thought you display here in your interpretation!

      So what is the vara by Umapati- avadhya by Deva, or by Danav or by Daitya or by Rakshasa or by Yaksha or by Gandharva or by Naga or by Garuda or by an Ant(krimi)!!

      Like this

      • Has Umapati given vara that Akampana be avadhya from Hanumana.

        Like this

        • similar logic you used with ant … parijat did simhika do tapasya only to ask that she be avadhya from an ant .. simhika stayed all her life in an OCEAN AND SHE WAS AFRAID OF ANT TO ASK BOON FROM BRAMHA THAT SHE BE AVADHYA FROM AN ANT …

          WHE ONE ASKS BOON FROM BRAMHA DO THEY ASK BEING NOT KILLED FROM ANT . IS ANT A SUCH AFEARFUL CREATURE .. SERIOUSLY YOU NEED A DOCTOR … YOUR BRAIN IS TICKING A BIT TOO FAST ..AND MISSING COMMON SENSE ..

          WHEN UMAPATI GIVES BOON OF ” BE AVADHYA ” BE NOT KILLED ” IT IS INCLUSIVE NOT KILLED BY ANYONE … NO ONE .CAN KIL YOU … DID BRAMHA IN CASE OF SIMHIKA OR UMA PATI IN CASE OF AKAMPANA SPECIFICALLY SAY YOU CAN BE KILLED BY HANUMAN …
          HANUMAN KILED THEM DESPITE UMAPATIS VARA IS STRAIGHTFORWARD .. SEEING YOUR POINT AND CONETNTION FAIL YOU HAVE LOST SENSES … AND ANT SEEMS LIKE A WHALE TO YU //

          HAPPENS … WHEN ONE SEES HIS STANCE ON SHAKY GROUNDS HE MAKES SILLY MISTAKES …

          Like this

          • Mathur Maths .. how to prove 2 =1 ? :D

            Say for e.g. a = b

            so a*a = b*a
            a2 – b2 = ab – b2
            (a+b)(a-b) = b(a-b)
            so a+b=b
            now we already saw a = b
            so a+a=a
            so 2a=a
            and hence 2= 1
            :D

            Like this

            • say basic assumption a!=b ..
              says show me verse where it is written!
              when you show a verse ” A is unique and different fro all alphabets ”
              ,, then MATHUR is it written A != b c d e f …z .. where it is written

              A is unique is BRAMHO uvach ..

              And his mathematics teacher committed suicide out of shame

              Like this

          • By what you portray as your common sense, then Ravana & Hiranyakashipu both must have been “avadhya” by all. So why was Hari forced to take Rama & Narsimha avatar, why not Hari come & kill them in chaturbhuja rupa then.

            Like this

            • He could have very well killed in Chaturbhuja rupa , he just chose to KIll him in narsiha rupa to honour the boon …HANUMAN doesnt honour boons of bRAMHA SHIVA .. we have showed ample evidence .. but now you are resorting to poor logic .. although you have acceoted SHANKAR had given boon and HANUMAN killed them now you have been caught off guard . you are trying to see loopholes in english language to fit the Killing of rakshas [ proetcted by SHANKAR boon of immortality ] by HANuman as some exception .. but you are failing miserably …. If one is given the boon of avadhyata .. and if his vadh takes place the boon has failed … in a duel between two if one dies he is called as slained by other no matter how ! the world say HANuman ne vadh kiya ..shankar ne avadhya hone ka var ka ullanghan hua ..

              Like this

              • How can vara of amaratva be given, who is born has to die. Nobody can bestow such a vara. Ravana had 1st asked for amaratva from Brahma but Ravana was given limited vara by Brahma of being unkillable except by Humans. Hence Hari was forced to take Human(Rama) form to be able to kill Ravana. Likewise is case of Hiranyakashipu where Hari was forced to take on identity of a new creature/sarga- Narsimha.

                Like this

              • “How can vara of amaratva be given, ?”

                well we have shown through many verses that it has been given and overtaken … so where is the argument , if you are complaining that it was not given to RAvana and HIARNAYAKASHIPU so it could not have been given to others , then it is silly ,
                GIVING boon , what to be given what not is prerogative of BOON , how can your logic apply to the prerogatives of bRMAHA ..or SHIVA ,, They have given amaratva to some and they have not given some , the pramana is there in texts for it .. wy should you complain ..or how water does your rant hold …

                a boss in an office grants leave to some and for some he says leave cannot be granted , its purely his prerogative .. just because he has not grated leave to you ..CAN YOU SAY his powers to grant leave is restricted ?

                Like this

          • See what Ravana asks for vara:
            This is silly. Have you guys even read Valmiki Ramayana? Rama is not Deva(=child of Aditi), Rama is Manushya(descendant of Manu, Manu & Rama are our ancestors).

            See Sarga 10/Uttara Kanda/Valmiki Ramayana here:
            http://valmiki.iitk.ac.in/index.php?id=sloka1

            Verse17: Ravana asks Brahma for sarvaamaratva he does not ask for just amartava. Sarva is used explicitly to show by all.

            Verse 19: Ravana then is forced to choose limited amartva- Brahma grants him as per his wish to not be killable at hands of Suparna(golden winged) means Garuda, Naga, Yaksha, Daitya, Danava, Rakshasa & Deva.

            In all history of our Brahma, there never has been anybody who is born & receives vara of sarvamaratva/sarvavadhyata.

            Like this

      • PLEASE HAVE A CHECK UP .. WHEN ONE SAYS YOU CANNOT BE SLAINED .. ALL ARE INCLUSIVE .. HAVE YOU FORGOTTEN WHAT CONSTITUTES A CONVERSATION …
        THE VERSE SAYS DESPITE BEING GIVEN BOON OF BEING IMMORTAL BY UMAPATI // HANUMAN KILLED HIM IN A SECOND

        THERE CANNOT BE ANY OTHER TRANSLATION /. SO YOU ARE INTROSPECTING WAS IT DEVA RAKSHAS ETC ETC …. ITS IMMORTALITY THAT REST THE MATTER

        Like this

        • “PLEASE HAVE A CHECK UP ..”

          Would advise the same for you as you are confusing unslainable with immortal.

          Unslainable & immortal are not the same. Former can be killed by disease, strangulation, asphxiation, …

          Like this

          • Typo: Replace asphxiation with asphyxiation.

            Like this

          • SO HANUMAN killed all those with shankar umapati vara by DISEASE , strangulation .. [ so it does not tantamount to overtaking Shankar boon ] shankar says you cannot slained ..an HAnuman kills him it is not boon failing … [ bhidu pau ser toh nahi liya na ]

            getting slained means one cannot get killed in a boxing match .. he can get killed by a sword or raampuri ..

            Koi doctor hai kya is illogical express par

            Like this

    • “NASTI NARAYANA SAMAM N BHUTAM NA BHAVISHYATI ETENA SATYA VAAKYEN sarvaarthaan sadhyamyyaham ””

      You really are overconfident in relying on Brahmovacha on Shiva when Brahma himself doesn’t.

      It is clear that you are incapable of logical deduction except brute parrotism.

      Sama means equal(=). The verse does not say/does not explore who is > Narayana, it merely makes the claim that nobody = Narayana.

      See how trickily composed/crafted Veda vachana are & how they delude.

      Like this

      • NOW YOU NEED A REAL HELP FROM MEDICAL FRATERNITY …

        WHEN THERE IS NO ONE EQUAL TO NARAYANA .. WHICH YOU HAVE ACCEPTED .. THEN SHIVA IS INCLUDED … LOGIC HAS EVADED YOU .. YOU HAVE BECOME ..SHAKY SEEING MANY QUOTES AND YOUR INABILITY TO UNDERSTAND BASIC WORDS ..WRITING ANYTHING WITHOUT HEAD AND TAIL MAKES YOU EVER FIT FOR A ….

        TRY SHOWING POSTS TO EVEN A LAYAN HE WILL LAUGH ROLLING ON GROUND AT IT …

        Like this

      • Now you have done one more unpardonable sin Parijat… you called Vedas as tricky and deluding. Try for some remorse dear, or you are will have gone into permanent hell for good.

        Like this

        • “unpardonable sin”
          “permanent hell”

          I can see where that is coming from. Though it is hard to decide between Christianity & Islam which one matches your cult better.

          Like this

          • @Parijat – there is no need to pick on English and words just because you have lost the debates and havent been able to prove your illogical statements, this doesnt make you come across any more “intelligent”. It also sounds like you are bored and this has become an entertainment for you as you are clearly not debating the right way and not willing to learn – get a life and spend time learning – from your posts it sounds like your are years away, dont waste any more time as in old age cannot imagine how much you wont able to grasp.

            Like this

          • @Mathur

            ..
            I can see where that is coming from. Though it is hard to decide between Christianity & Islam which one matches your cult better.//
            I am wondered by your oblivion on the subject you have taken to debate
            We ain’t any cult..Its a “authoritative” vedic school of thought which enjoys a huge following spread across Bharat Varsha, and also has a world wide Acceptance because of its exclusive interpretative grandeur on Veda/Shastra, which itself is matchless.

            It is this mata that has given true meaning of what “devotion”/ bhakti rasa is, which other Pre Dwaita could not give its correct place with a proper understanding of scriptures.

            Nevertheless, you know nothing except calling names, “Cult” to a mata/siddhanta which enjoys utmost respect even from followers of Adi Shankarachrya (others included)…

            //“unpardonable sin”
            “permanent hell”//
            I am sure yours must surely be a cult.. experience indeed confirms there exist very few people like yourself, and Seems there is no mention of sins and Hell in your agamas..Good for you! Now i understand, why you are here!

            Like this

            • Do you want to debate whether you be a cult or not.

              Better answer “I must now pause to ask if your cult believes in Bhagvata Purana or not?”

              Like this

              • @Mathur

                //Do you want to debate whether you be a cult or not.

                Better answer “I must now pause to ask if your cult believes in Bhagvata Purana or not?”//

                This is in reply to Mr.Mathur’s ‘acidic’ comments in the debate he is carrying senselessly..

                Mr. Mathur seems,to say the least,to be blinded by his angst,or his utter ignorance,or his near total lack of knowledge of Shastra/Vedas.,or all of them,which he seems to be trying very hard and quite successfully,though,to advertise…to all and sundry…

                Firstly,the entire quote is from the Puranas.,by our illustrious Guru ji ,who is such a “Shastra nupana”., “Praveena”and has been carrying such brilliant work on Madhva Siddhanta by educating jiggyasu jeevas by writing so much on all aspects of Shastras along with other knowledgeable stalwarts,…and backed by benevolent acts of providing free astrological readings/patha and remedies as loka hita/loka kalyana.

                Secondly, it is obvious that he does not either know,”how to study Veda/Shastras in a correct way because in-spite of quoting verses like “tat Vishno Paramam Padam” from Upanishats to variable numbers of verses quoted from Shrutis to Smrutis all this time by our Guru ji and others respected members he is relentlessly carrying this debate with no “grounds”.. insufficient knowledge of Sanskrit, Shastra/Vedas etc..

                Then he dares to insult Dharma by calling impotent and “such words”, attributing words like “cult” to a parama sattivika siddhanta. Then he say we insult Brahma/Rudradi devatas..without understanding our siddhanta..NOWHERE IN MADHVA SIDDHANTA ALL DEVATAS ARE LOOKED DOWN..INSTEAD WE SAY ALL THE DEVATAS ARE “PARIVARA” OF SHRI VISHNU..Please do not comment when you don’t know anything about our siddhanta..there is NO PLACE for Dvesha on Devatas/Sattvika jeevas in OUR SIDDHANTA..PLEASE REGISTER THIS IMPORTANT ASPECT IN YOUR MIND!!

                //Better answer “I must now pause to ask if your cult believes in Bhagvata Purana or not?”//

                You utterly lack knowledge of shastras to say the least..by now we all know about shallow knowledge that you carry..Instead I need to ask you whether you and your whatever cult you follow believes Bhagvat Purana..??

                Lastly,ignorance is BLISS and…arrogance is a tell-tale sign of ignorance…!

                On top of it he has been obnoxious all through (calling names on Guru ji, terming us “Cults”, Sri Ram as “impotent” with whatever meaning he attributes, eluding comments on the exact verses quoted by us, using “word jugglery”,the list is endless ) and all this is a sign that he does not have anything left now..still he is trying to “claim” his persistence y by going back and forth..,he should have tested this knowledge in his “own cult”…what he has remarks can only be termed as plain TRIPE…

                Never mind Mr Mathur’s silly comments,most tenderfoots like him, often make the mistake of imagining that they are “experts”,within a little bit of knowledge of shastras/puranas. !

                And lastly probably whatever I have written on our siddhanta diligently explaining him, is beyond the comprehension of Parijat Mathur…

                In my humble opinion,it is such “upstarts”, in all the fields in general,who think they are “Maha Gyani” and a greater Panditya than even the pontiffs…within a few years of learning…Learning shastras is a blessing of the God……Also the more knowledgeable,who’ve been blessed by Goddess Saraswati,are very humble…and certainly not arrogant. “Vidya Vinayena shobhite”

                Like others and me however,they could be sticklers for perfection though and a mite impatient with tenderfoots,because they believe that “not knowing a thing is nobody’s fault but knowing a thing wrongly is not pardonable”…This is my considered opinion after having seen Mathurs writing for more than a week now..

                May God make better sense prevail…

                With Best Wishes,
                Sanjay

                Like this

              • Viju Rao said:

                very well put sri sanjay..its pleasure to read ur posts..

                Like this

              • @Mathur,
                Extracts from Padma Purana

                Describing about the superiority of Lord Vishnu among the trinity Gods’ Sage Vashishth narrated the following tale–During ancient times, Swayambhuva manu had once gone to Mandarachal mountain to perform a yagya. Many scholars and learned men had come to attend that yagya. Very soon, they got into a debate as to who was the supreme among all the deities. Some of them eulogised the greatness of Brahma, while some said that lord Shiva was the greatest of all the deities. Failing to come to any conclusion all of them requested Sage Bhrigu to find out as to who was the greatest among the trinity Gods.

                Sage Bhrigu went to meet Lord Shiva at Kailash mountain. He saw Nandi standing guard at the main entrance. Sage Bhrigu arrogantly ordered Nandi to inform Lord Shiva of his arrival. Nandi refused to comply with Bhrigu’s command. Sage Bhrigu cursed Lord Shiva by saying–Your master- Shiva, would bear the consequences of showing disrespect to me. From today onwards people would make offerings of forbidden articles to him.’

                Sage Bhrigu then went to meet Lord Brahma. After reaching Brahmaloka, he made salutations to lord Brahma.Lord Brahma also did not give any respect to Sage Bhrigu and neglected him. Sage Bhrigu became furious and cursed Lord Brahma—’Being intoxicated by your Rajoguna, you have shown disrespect to me. From today onwards people will not worhsip you.’ Sage Bhrigu then went to meet Lord Vishnu at his abode- Ksheersagar. He did not have any problem in reaching the place where Lord Vishnu was taking rest on Sheshnag, engrossed in his yoganidra. Goddess Laxmi was pressing Vishnu’s legs with total devotion. Sage Bhrigu kicked Lord Vishnu on his chest. Lord Vishnu woke up and seeing sage Bhrigu said—’O Great Brahmin! Your tender foot must have got hurt because of my chest, which is as hard as Vajra. How blessed I am to have been touched by a brahmin’s foot.’

                Lord Vishnu got up and eulogised Sage Bhrigu. This gesture of Lord Vishnu made Sage Bhrigu cry in joy. Now, he was convinced as to who was the supreme among all the three deities.Sage Bhrigu returned to Mandarachal mountain where all the sages were anxiously waiting for him. He declared–

                ‘Lord Brahma is the possesser of Rajoguna, while Lord Shiva possesses tamoguna. Only Lord Vishnu is the proud possessor of Satvaguna and hence He is the supreme among all three of them.’ After finishing his tale, Sage Vashishth told the sages that anybody who worships Lord Vishnu with complete faith and total devotion become liberated from all his sins. A devotee of Lord Vishnu attains to Vishnu Loka after his death.

                Like this

      • Murali said:

        Mr. Mathur.. dude! Your brain seems to have italian mud in it…. this verse does not explore who
        is LESS than NARAYANA as well… this is the category where Shiva, Brahma and entire anantha
        koti brahmandas fall under.. The verse is indeed crystal clear if at all you can read/understand
        basic Sanskrit… surely you do not know how to read plain SIMPLE English at the least, leave
        about Itihasas/Puranas/Vedas/Upanishads etc etc. We will come back to your English part little later…
        but for this verse…. it is CLEARLY written that there is no sama to NARAYANA in the PAST or in the FUTURE… Do the words PAST and FUTURE make any sense to you? If one has to become greater than NARAYANA, then he/she has to first EQUAL (sama) NARAYANA and then become greater. It is clearly being said that there is no sama to NARAYANA in the past… so how could anyone become greater than NARAYANA now. Again there could be no one sama to
        NARAYANA in the future, so how could one become greater than him in future???? When we say if there is
        no one equal to CEO of a company, then is a manager in the company greater than the CEO just because CEO is not equal to manager ???? kid.. begone and develop some common sense.. it seems to be uncommon in you….

        *********************

        Now coming to your English reading skills……

        Earlier what Sanjay ji wrote is “He boons so many Daityas who later become “bhu bhara” and
        Lord Hari emancipates”… If you read carefully,
        it is written that Shiva’s boons to Daityas become bhara to BHU and NOT NARAYANA as you childishly misinterpreted and misstated.

        If you asked someone to go and read Mahabharat again just for writing Abhimanyu instead of Parikshit by mistake, then for your misinterpretation, you should go and learn to read English
        first and more importantly comprehend what ever you read in CORRECT fashion! No wonder Vedas seem tricky and delusive to you!

        You are clearly under delusion and hurry to point at NARAYANA even at no opportunity to do so. How could you in turn say that this sacred blog is insulting Shiva? This blog suggests
        worshipping Shiva and Durga as well, as family members of LORD HARI, but just not as
        superiors to HARI as that is not a fact. You also built your subsequent statements related to this topic based on your above delusion that Shiva’s varas are bhara to HARI. So, you can dump
        all that blabbery into dust bin without hesitation.

        *********
        When Shiva’s varas become bhara to BHU, then LORD HARI emancipates… do you know why?? Answer: To restore DHARMA…a simple and well known fact. You need weblinks? here is one
        from your favourite website:

        Refer to Chapter 4, verses 7 & 8 of Srimad Bhadawad Gita.. Refer to Page 19 in the below link….
        http://www.astrojyoti.com/pdfs/DevanagariFiles/bhagavad_gita_standard.pdf

        Yadaa yadaa hi dharmasya glaanirbhavati bhaarata |
        Abhyutthaanam adharmasya tadaatmaanM sRRijaamyaham ||

        ParitraaNaya Saadhuunaam Vinaashaaya cha Dushkritaam |
        Dharma Samsthaapanaardhaaya Sambhavaami yuge yuge ||

        So, LORD HARI emancipates to restore Dharma!!!!!!!

        So who actually disturbed Dharma? Ans. Daityas..

        Daityas did so due to mada of what and due to revenge on whom? Ans. Due to mada of SHIVA/BRAHMA’s boons and due to revenge on LORD HARI and Devas…

        So who aided in destruction of Dharma? Ans: SHIVA and BRAHMA with their varas given to ones who would misuse them.

        And who restored Dharma? Answer: LORD HARI…. incarnating whenever there is adharma prevailing. He is readily capable of slaying all demons.. it is not at all a bhara to him. It
        is like a child game to him, in fact, the whole Shristi is itself a child game to him.

        Now even a kid should be able to say that one who restored Dharma is superior by all means
        than ones who aid in destroying Dharma. Needless to mention that LORD HARI is superior by all
        means than SHIVA and BRAHMA.

        ************

        You wrote “Show any instance where Narayana gives vara & it is bhara for Shiva.”

        A big YES in response to your question.. This is what you should have already learn’t from Ambarisha episode which is discussed so extensively here. Durvasa(Shiva) himself had to
        flee for life for going to harm Ambarisha. NARAYANA just as he protects any Bhaktha, was protecting Ambarisha and that became a bhara of LIFE for Shiva, leave aside NARAYANA giving full-fledged vara to his
        Bhaktha and that becoming a bhara to Shiva. Anyone who comes even near a VISHNU
        bhaktha to harm will have to run for his life and no DEVA/MAHADEVA can save him..

        Again, Banasura’s episode is itself a classic example where anyone including Shiva
        who wants to hurt or support in giving trouble to LORD HARI’s devotees will be slain/insulted/defeated badly. Shiva bhakth Ravan was killed by RAMA(VISHNU) while VISHNU bhakth Ambarish made Durvasa (Shiva) himself flee for life.

        LORD HARI’s devotess couldn’t be harmed Shiva/Brahma while on the other hand
        Shiva/Brahma’s devotees were slained by LORD HARI in his incarnations for their
        misdemeanour. Is this not Pratyaksha Pramana that LORD HARI is superior to SHIVA/BRAHMA? Again and again, even a kid should be able to say that LORD HARI is superior by all means to SHIVA and BRAHMA.

        **************

        How childishly did you say “It is only master who can burden servant with task/job.” !!!!!!!!!!!

        Kids mess up the house with their body waste due to ignorance of knowledge of where
        restroom is, how to perform nature calls etc.. Parents/Grand Parents clean the mess and render
        the house ever neatest again as others in the house would be affected. Who is the master
        here and who is the servant? How dare anyone could address someone in Parents’
        dignity as servants? Likewise NARAYANA clearing Bhu bhaara and mess
        created by Shiva/Brahma’s varas only establishes his superiority over his kid and grandson
        Brahma and Shiva respectively.

        A subordinate in office creates big mess by inducing numerous defects in the work he does. Then the dutiful manager who controls all proceedings comes and solves all problems with
        his superior intelligence/capabilities. Who is master here and who is the servant? LORD HARI is evidently the manager of SHIVA/BRAHMA, HE cleared all the mess created due to
        thier varas many times;

        Your logic stinks big time!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

        Like this

        • Murali said:

          Read “Srimad Bhadawad Gita” as “Srimad Bhagawad Gita”…

          Like this

        • Viju Rao said:

          murli bhai basuri sorry band baja dala…brilliant reply.

          Like this

        • Great post .. I read it many times … SIMPLY HARI SARVOTTAMA

          Like this

          • Murali said:

            Acharya varya and Viju ji!

            Humble Pranamams! This is LORD’s devotee seeking your blessings. SRI KRISHNASYA dasosmyaham! Please bless me.

            Humble Pranamams,
            Murali

            Like this

    • Pull up my post to “Nasti Narayana” from your spam, if there.

      Like this

Dear Readers , If you are asking a query , Kindly do not forget to worship SRIMAN NARAYANA and HANUMANJI and then write a number within 1800 followed by single digit number [ within 1-8 ] ,kindly Give time and current Place where you are asking query from ! , followed by number of virtual beetle leaves ,nuts and fruits you would like to give astrologer , and clear place ,time and date of birth . [take your hands off keyboard ] TOUCH a BODY part and kindly mention which part of the body Your hand is touching [ sprishtanga ] .... state your problem clearly , let us know what is it that your are looking for without ambiguity ! start and end with salutation to HARI ! If above procedure is not adhered to ,then no answers will be given !

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Tag Cloud

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,227 other followers

%d bloggers like this: