Sadasiva as visnu tattva - looking for reference

is there a sastra somewhere saying that sadasiva is visnu-tattva?

Sadashiva cannot be properly considered Vishnu Tattva, but He is not an ordinary ‘demigod’ either. The Vayu-Purana states that Sadasiva's abode is beyond the mundane universe:
sri mahadeva lokas tu saptavaranato bahih;
nityah sukhamayah satyo labhyas tat sevakottamaih
"But Sri Mahadeva's planet is outside of the seven layers of matter that cover the universe. It is eternal, blissful, real and attainable by His greatest devotees."
Srila Rupa Gosvami writes in Laghu Bhagavatamrta (43): sadasivakhya tan murtis tamoguna varjita "Unlike the ordinary Siva, Sadasiva is beyond tamo guna."
and Baladeva Vidyabhusana writes:
sivaloke vaikuntha dhamni "Sivaloka is Vaikuntha-dhama."

www.madangopal.com

I noticed that sivaloke is locative case, which could read as Vaikuntha is situated within Sivaloka. I think dhamni may also be the locative case, but my vyakarana is a bit rusty. If it is, then maybe the verse is referring to something or someone (?) that is situated in Vaikuntha-dhama [which is the same as] Sivaloka. What is the entire verse? Also the Sanksrit you quoted by Rupa does not say 'unlike the ordinary Siva'. Is that an incomplete quote?

Correct. Baladeva is stating this in a short phrase in his tika on Laghu Bhagavatamrita. shivaloke - vaikuntha dhamni. There is a dash in between. "In Shiva loka means: in Vaikuntha dhama." The text from Laghu Bhagavatamrita follows one in which it is stated that sometimes the Gunavatara Shiva emanates from Brahma's or Vishnu's forehead, or sometimes from Sankarshana. The full text # 43 runs - sadashivakhya tan murtis tamoguna vivarjita; sarva karana bhutasav anga bhuta svayam prabhoh; vayavyadisu saiveyam shivaloke pradarshita. The last line of this text is to the point: "In the Vayu and other Puranas he is shown to be in Shiva loka." To this locative phrase 'in Shiva Loka', Baladeva comments shiva loke vaikuntha dhamni - 'In Shiva Loka means in Vaikuntha dhama'.
Indeed, in text 43 Rupa Gosvami did not literally compare Sadashiva with the Shiva which is in command of tamoguna, but it is obvious when one reads the preceding text, 42, of Laghu Bhagavatamrita.

thx for ur replies, interesting.

http://www.audarya-fellowship.com/showflat...o=&fpart=2&vc=1

according to madhava ji: "...Sadashiva is the Supreme Lord. More precisely, Sadashiva is of His vilasa-murtis (vaibhava-vilasa)"

and in his purport here http://vedabase.net/cc/adi/6/79 bv svami says something similar: "In the Väyu Puräna there is a description of Sadäsiva in one of the Vaikuntha planets. That Sadäsiva is a direct expansion of Lord Krsna's form for pastimes"

is there a sastra somewhere saying hes vaibhava-vilasa (perhaps vayu puran)?

& interesting to note:

http://www.vnn.org/editorials/ET0009/ET23-6280.html

narayan maharaj: "In Brhat Bhagavatamrta Sankhara told Narada, 'Prahlada Maharaja is superior to me.' No harm. On the other hand Sankhara is Sadasiva himself. He is Visnu-tattva and he is also Gopisvara Mahadeva."

http://swami.org/sanga/archives/pages/volu...e_two/m101.html

tripurari swami: "Siva is best thought of from the Vaisnava perspective as a devotee of Krsna. But he is also God, although somewhat differently from the way in which Rama and Krsna are God. Then again, Sadasiva is God in every respect. Siva is a complex tattva. Always keep the highest regard for him"


& i dont know sanskrit, so did acbsp translate accurately 'supreme brahman' & 'paramatma' in the following bhagavata slokas

http://bhagavatam.net/4/6/42
Lord Brahma said: My dear Lord Siva, I know that you are the controller of the entire material manifestation, the combination father and mother of the cosmic manifestation, and the Supreme Brahman beyond the cosmic manifestation as well. I know you in that way

http://bhagavatam.net/4/6/46
My dear Lord, devotees who have fully dedicated their lives unto your lotus feet certainly observe your presence as Paramatma in each and every being, and as such they do not differentiate between one living being and another. Such persons treat all living entities equally. They never become overwhelmed by anger like animals, who can see nothing without differentiation

Don't have the answer to that question dhaa, and don't have the time to look into it (my apologies). Maybe Jagat can jump in at this point, if he is reading this topic.

Keep in mind that Prabhupada did not operative in a vacuum while publishing that translation. Pradyumna and Nitai were working full time on the Sanskrit translation/editing side by side with Prabhupada, and the rest of us were also involved over at the Sanskrit Dept. in Los Angeles, once they hammered out the rough draft. My first job starting out there was touching up and opaquing the original Devanagari, which was photographed from the Gita Press edition, which was not a great printing, so the lines in the script needed some inking in, etc. - the final stages before going to proofreaders and the press. I was just one of several Sanskrit editors and proofreaders in the department, which included Duryodhan Guru, Jagannatha, Ramestha, Gopavrindesh, Kusakratha and Gopipranadhana. In short, it was a team effort.

no problem ji. i thank u for ur time & the answers u have given

woa! i had no idea, thx for the info

another question if i may, does any1 know what any acaryas say about sb 4.6.42 & 46 in their commentaries?

in his purport to 42 acbsp says: "...Lord Siva's position is described in Brahma-samhita: there is no difference between Lord Visnu and Lord Siva in their original positions, but still Lord Siva is different from Lord Visnu. The example is given that the milk in yogurt is not different from the original milk from which it was made"

'supreme brahman' & 'paramatma' being in the translations of verses 42 & 46, & the part of the purport to 42 i highlighted in green makes me think sadasiva is visnu tattva, but i dont know

How interesting! I don't recall any of the published books giving credit to the Gita Press for use of its Devanagari texts. Do you know whether the Gita Press had explicitly released into the public domain the texts that the BBT photographed, or whether some legal arrangement was made by which the BBT could use copyrighted Gita Press material?

I hope this was all done legally and above-board, because if it wasn't it could lead to some nasty copyright battles. It would sure be ironic if the BBT, which has recently portrayed itself as the victim of others infringing its copyrights, was itself founded upon the infringement of others' copyrights.

Sorry. Sadashiva has always been a mystery to me. I imagine that Advaita has been concerned with this more than anyone, so I would defer to his understanding.

Oh, Vamsiji, you haven't heard of the plagiarism controversy? Gopiparanadhan tries to explain it away in an article in Iskcon Communications Journal available at their website.

But you may find that Gita Press does not hold the copywrite to the Devanagari text. They had to get it from somewhere too, an older text. Copywrite would have run out, if it ever existed. Its probably Public Domain.

Does Gita Press even identify which manuscripts they are using? If not, then its a free-for-all, I reckon.

That's right, Adiyen. Those original Sanskrit texts predate existing copyright laws by centuries. Any Devanagari used in a publication such as an English translation by BBT is certainly public domain, regardless of whose edition they were reproduced from. Also, most modern printings of Sanskrit texts in the original Devanagari are based on the old palm-leaf hand-written manuscripts that are available and for the most part not identical. Editors decide which versions are the most accurate and then use those, and probably have taken the final cut from multiple sources. Granted there are different choices in style for the typeset, but those are not copyrightable to begin with.


There is an interesting fact about most printed maps. They will invariably have some small feature in the far lower right corner which does not actually exist in the region being mapped, just to avoid the whole copyright issue.

http://www.audarya-fellowship.com/showflat...o=&fpart=2&vc=1

"...Laghu Bhagavatamrita....

31 Siva's form named Sadasiva, who is a direct expansion of the Personality of Godhead, is the cause of all causes, is free from the slightest scent of the mode of ignorance, and resides in Sivaloka, is described in the Vayu Purana and other scriptures"

'direct expansion' & 'cause of all causes', sounds like visnu tattva right?

What you quoted from me earlier on from an old Audarya topic, the point about vilasa-murti, was just a Sanskrit rendition of Bhaktivedanta Swami's idea of "Krishna's form for pastimes". Now that I have the original Sanskrit at hand, it doesn't seem to say that anywhere.


The passages of Laghu Bhagavatamrita quoted in that thread are not very accurately translated. I suggest you check out the original Sanskrit text from the Grantha Mandira to verify the ideas there.

The quote above is taken from the second chapter entitled puruSAvatAra-guNAvatAra-nirUpaNam. The original Sanskrit reads as follows:

sadA-zivAkhyA tan-mUrtis tamogandha-vivarjitA |
sarvakAraNa-bhUtAsAv aGga-bhUtA svayaM prabhoH |
vAyavyAdiSu saiveyaM ziva-loke pradarzitA ||31||

"The form called Sada-shiva is devoid of even a scent of ignorance. He is the cause of all beings, a being who is a limb of the Lord Himself. In Vayu and other [scriptures], Siva is described as residing in Siva-loka."

The two key-words you highlighted, "cause of all causes" and "direct expansion" are translations of "sarvakAraNa-bhUta" and "aGga-bhUtA". "sarvakAraNa-bhUta" specifically refers to Siva not as the origin of the spirit souls, but as the origin of the bhUtas, the various species of living entities of this world. "aGga-bhUtA svayaM prabhoH" means that he is an "aGga" of the Lord. However, "aGga" is not used as consistently as "aMza" and "kalA" are in discussing the manifestations of the Lord. In fact, I do not recall reading an exact definition at all. The only verse I can think of is the "saGgopAGgAstra-pArzadam" of Bhagavata 11.5.32, in which I believe we interpret the word "aGga" as "associates". Therefore, the verse in question cannot be considered conclusive on Sada-shiva's ontological status.

The next text of Laghu Bhagavatamrita cites Brahma Samhita 5.8 to illustrate Sada-shiva. The tika of Jiva Gosvamin doesn't comment much beyond the general understanding of Brahma Samhita in this regard. There is no mention of Sada-shiva's being Vishnu-tattva.

are there 2 sadasivas? 1 in mahesa dhama(the 1 mentioned in brahma samhita?) and 1 in vaikuntha(the 1 mentioned in vayu puran?)?

how about the translations of 'supreme brahman' & 'paramatma' in the following bhagavata slokas, are they accurate

http://bhagavatam.net/4/6/42

brahmovāca
jāne tvām īśaṃ viśvasya
jagato yoni-bījayoḥ
śakteḥ śivasya ca paraṃ
yat tad brahma nirantaram

(woa cool, diacritics show up on this forum. or is it just on my screen?)

Lord Brahma said: My dear Lord Siva, I know that you are the controller of the entire material manifestation, the combination father and mother of the cosmic manifestation, and the Supreme Brahman beyond the cosmic manifestation as well. I know you in that way

http://bhagavatam.net/4/6/46

na vai satāṃ tvac-caraṇārpitātmanāṃ
bhūteṣu sarveṣv abhipaśyatāṃ tava
bhūtāni cātmany apṛthag-didṛkṣatāṃ
prāyeṇa roṣo 'bhibhaved yathā paśum

My dear Lord, devotees who have fully dedicated their lives unto your lotus feet certainly observe your presence as Paramatma in each and every being, and as such they do not differentiate between one living being and another. Such persons treat all living entities equally. They never become overwhelmed by anger like animals, who can see nothing without differentiation

kiM ca sadA-zivaH svayaM-rUpAGga-vizeSa-svarUpo nirguNaH saH zivasyAMzI | ataevAsya brahmato’py AdhikyaM viSNunA sAmyaM ca | bhAgavatamRta-kanA 6 |

"He who is known as Sada-shiva is a special form of a limb of His own form, beyond the modes of nature, and the origin of the Shivas. Therefore he is superior to Brahma and equal to Vishnu."

Now, it is a good question what exactly svayaM-rUpAGga-vizeSa-svarUpo means. Here the equality with Vishnu is obviously considered in terms of being above the gunas.

I don't think there are two Sadashivas. I am not certain whether the passage of Brahma-samhita refers specifically to Sadashiva or to one of the Shivas he manifests. Given that the central Shiva-character of Brahma Samhita is Sambhu, my good guess is that it refers to Sambhu who is an amsa of Sadashiva.


Shiva is param brahma nirantaram, spirit beyond the temporal world.



I can't find the word Paramatma in the Sanskrit.


They are in Unicode encoding, so they show up with anyone who has extended Verdana, Arial etc. fonts installed. They should be such with all modern Windows installations. However, they are not without issues (as you see from the quotes above, for example).

thx 4 ur replies, interesting.

what do some bhagavata commentaries say on sb 4.6.42 & 46?

and what category of expansion would sadasiva be in

Unfortunately I don't have the tikas at my disposal here.

The most we can deduct out of the references we've seen is that he is an "anga" of Bhagavan. There is no further definite indication. One could interpret "anga" as "amsa" (as Krishnadas does in CC 1.3.71 while discussing the kRSNa-varNam verse), which would essenetially equate him with Caturvyuha Vishnu-tattva (not avataras, who are amsa-amsa). However, there is a context to the equation of anga and amsa in CC 1.3, and I am not confident to take it out of context and stretch it here.

I keep seeing the idea of calling him a vilasa-murti of Bhagavan, first in that commentary of Bhaktivedanta Swami and now in a translation of svayaM-rUpAGga-vizeSa-svarUpa in Bhagavatamrita Kana text 6, but it is a mystery where they originally draw the idea of vilasa-murti from.

ok, thx anyway ji. does any1 else have them? advaita das ji?

does baladeva or another acarya comment on this

No sorry, not here @ least.



Bhagavatamrita Kana is already a commentary, by Visvanatha Cakravarti. As far as I know there is no further commentary down the line.

http://pushtimarg.net/Download/Book/Englis...ish/Balbodh.pdf

http://pushtikul.com/shodash_grantha/2_balbodha.asp

http://www.geocities.com/pushti_marg/balbodh.htm

i found 3 online translations of vallabacharya's balbodh, i dont know sanskrit so i dont know how accurate they are. the translation by shyamdas on pushtimarg.net says shiva & vishnu both can give moksha, are the supreme brahman & the self of all things. the 1 on pushtikul.com says both can give moksha and are 2 forms of brahman. the 1 on geocities says both can give moksha and are created by brahman (i take it this 1s not accurate)

i see the transliteration is on granthamandira.org:

te sarvärthä na cädyena çästraà kiàcid udéritam |
ataù çivaç ca viñëuç ca jagato hitakärakau ||11||

vastunaù sthiti-saàhärau käryau çästra-pravartakau |
brahmaiva tädåçaà yasmät sarvätmakatayoditau ||12||

nirdoña-pürëa-guëatä tat-tac-chästre tayoù kåtä |
bhoga-mokña-phale dätuà çaktau dväv api yady api ||13||

bhogaù çivena mokñas tu viñëuneti viniçcayaù |
loke 'pi yat prabhur bhuìkte tan na yacchati karhicit ||14||

can some1 translate please, & how authoritative would valllabhs words be for gaudiyas

reference #'s please, or is it quoted by an acarya w/o the #s

Sorry Dhaa, I cannot remember where I got this quote from. I originally quoted this in my book about Advaita Acarya, which I compiled many years ago. But rest assured - I did not compose it myself. I can imagine it must be in one of the acaryas tikas. I could not find it in Baladeva's tika on Laghu Bhagavatamrita; I thought it might have been there. I will post the origin and verse number whenever I find it, OK?

i know, i just like to have #s

ok ji, whenevers convienient for u or any1 else that has it

any1 want to take a shot at the balbodh translation

http://bhagavatam.net/8/7/23

guṇa-mayyā sva-śaktyāsya
sarga-sthity-apyayān vibho
dhatse yadā sva-dṛg bhūman
brahma-viṣṇu-śivābhidhām

O lord, you are self-effulgent and supreme. You create this material world by your personal energy, and you assume the names Brahmā, Viṣṇu and Maheśvara when you act in creation, maintenance and annihilation


http://bhagavatam.net/8/7/24

tvaṃ brahma paramaṃ guhyaṃ
sad-asad-bhāva-bhāvanam
nānā-śaktibhir ābhātas
tvam ātmā jagad-īśvaraḥ

You are the cause of all causes, the self-effulgent, inconceivable, impersonal Brahman, which is originally Parabrahman. You manifest various potencies in this cosmic manifestation

in contrast to what acbsp says in his purport to 4.6.42, he says in his purports on these 2 verses: "This prayer is actually offered to Lord Viṣṇu, the puruṣa, who in His incarnations as the guṇa-avatāras assumes the names Brahmā, Viṣṇu and Maheśvara.........When Lord Śiva is worshiped as Parabrahman, the worship is meant for Lord Viṣṇu"

in his purport to 4.6.42 he says theres no difference between visnu & siva in their original positions, so im guessing that in these 2 purports hes not referring to siva in his original position

& its interesting that the name sadasivam is used in this chapter of bhagavata, verse 19

any comments

http://bhagavatam.net/8/12/43

ayi vyapaśyas tvam ajasya māyāṃ
parasya puṃsaḥ para-devatāyāḥ
ahaṃ kalānām ṛṣabho 'pi muhye
yayāvaśo 'nye kim utāsvatantrāḥ

Lord Śiva said: O Goddess, you have now seen the illusory energy of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is the unborn master of everyone. Although I am one of the principal expansions of His Lordship, even I was illusioned by His energy. What then is to be said of others, who are fully dependent on māyā?

kalanam is there, does it necessarily mean hes visnu tattva

ive heard advaita acarya and sadasiva are the same, is this said in sastra?

heres some stuff about advaita & anga-

sei näräyaëera mukhya aìga,—advaita
‘aìga’-çabde aàça kari’ kahe bhägavata (Adi 6.22)

näräyaëas tvaà na hi sarva-dehinäm
ätmäsy adhéçäkhila-loka-säkñé
näräyaëo ’ìgaà nara-bhü-jaläyanät
tac cäpi satyaà na tavaiva mäyä (Adi 6.23) [quoting from sb 10.14.14]

éçvarera ‘aìga’ aàça—cid-änanda-maya
mäyära sambandha nähi’ ei çloke kaya (Adi 6.24)

‘aàça’ nä kahiyä, kene kaha täìre ‘aìga’
‘aàça’ haite ‘aìga,’ yäte haya antaraìga (Adi 6.25)

mahä-viñëura aàça—advaita guëa-dhäma
éçvare abheda, teïi ‘advaita’ pürëa näma (Adi 6.26)

Çré Advaita is the principal limb [aìga] of Näräyaëa. Çrémad-Bhägavatam speaks of “limb” [aìga] as “a plenary portion” [aàça] of the Lord. “O Lord of lords, You are the seer of all creation. You are indeed everyone’s dearest life. Are You not, therefore, my father, Näräyaëa? ‘Näräyaëa’ refers to one whose abode is in the water born from Nara [Garbhodakaçäyé Viñëu], and that Näräyaëa is Your plenary portion. All Your plenary portions are transcendental. They are absolute and are not creations of mäyä.” This verse describes that the limbs and plenary portions of the Lord are all spiritual; They have no relationship with the material energy. Why has Çré Advaita been called a limb and not a part? The reason is that “limb” implies greater intimacy. Çré Advaita, who is a reservoir of virtues, is the main limb of Mahä-Viñëu. His full name is Advaita, for He is identical in all respects with that Lord

---

some verses i thought were interesting, parts i thought were interesting i highlight in brown

[except for abhasa, 'sväìga-viçeñäbhäsa-rüpe' in madhya 20.273 to me looks similar to 'svayaM-rUpAGga-vizeSa-svarUpa' in Bhagavatamrita Kana text 6]

sväìga-viçeñäbhäsa-rüpe prakåti-sparçana
jéva-rüpa ‘béja’ täte kailä samarpaëa (Madhya 20.273)

“To impregnate with the seeds of the living entities, the Lord Himself does not directly touch the material energy, but by His specific functional expansion He touches the material energy, and thus the living entities, who are His parts and parcels, are impregnated into material nature

se puruñera aàça—advaita, nähi kichu bheda
çaréra-viçeña täìra—nähika viccheda (Adi 6.10)

sahäya karena täìra la-iyä ‘pradhäna’
koöi brahmäëòa karena icchäya nirmäëa (Adi 6.11)

Çré Advaita Äcärya is a plenary part of that puruña and so is not different from Him. Indeed, Çré Advaita Äcärya is not separate but is another form of that puruña. He [Advaita Äcärya] helps in the pastimes of the puruña, with whose material energy and by whose will He creates innumerable universes



éçvara-särüpya päya päriñada-gaëa
catur-bhuja, péta-väsa, yaiche näräyaëa (Adi 6.32)

advaita-äcärya—éçvarera aàça-varya
täìra tattva-näma-guëa, sakali äçcarya (Adi 6.33)

His associates have the same bodily features as the Lord. They all have four arms and are dressed in yellow garments like Näräyaëa. Çré Advaita Äcärya is the principal limb of the Supreme Lord. His truths, names and attributes are all wonderful

[ i might be stretching it here, but in adi 6.22, 33 & 37 the translation says advaita is a principal limb, to me that sounds similar to sb 8.12.43 where the translation of shivas words says hes a principal expansion ]



äpane puruña—viçvera ‘nimitta’-käraëa
advaita-rüpe ‘upädäna’ hana näräyaëa (Adi 6.16)

‘nimittäàçe’ kare teìho mäyäte ékñaëa
‘upädäna’ advaita karena brahmäëòa-såjana (Adi 6.17)

Lord Viñëu Himself is the efficient [nimitta] cause of the material world, and Näräyaëa in the form of Çré Advaita is the material cause [upädäna]. Lord Viñëu, in His efficient aspect, glances over the material energy, and Çré Advaita, as the material cause, creates the material world

nija såñöi-çakti prabhu saïcäre pradhäne
éçvarera çaktye tabe haye ta’ nirmäëe (Adi 6.19)

advaita-rüpe kare çakti-saïcäraëa
ataeva advaita hayena mukhya käraëa (Adi 6.20)

advaita-äcärya koöi-brahmäëòera kartä
ära eka eka mürtye brahmäëòera bhartä (Adi 6.21)

The Lord infuses the material ingredients with His own creative potency. Then, by the power of the Lord, creation takes place. In the form of Advaita He infuses the material ingredients with creative energy. Therefore, Advaita is the original cause of creation. Çré Advaita Äcärya is the creator of millions and millions of universes, and by His expansions [as Garbhodakaçäyé Viñëu] He maintains each and every universe

pürve yaiche kaila sarva-viçvera såjana
avatari’ kaila ebe bhakti-pravartana (Adi 6.27)

As He had formerly created all the universes, now He descended to introduce the path of bhakti

This narration is near-identical in the Balya Lila Sutra of Laudiya Krishnadas and the Advaita Prakash by Ishan Nagara -
“As Lord Sadasiva, the transcendental deity from Vaikuntha who is the fountainhead of all the forms of Siva within the innumerable mundane universes, saw the wicked age of Kali, or quarrel, destroying all godly qualities in man, He became filled with compassion. After many deliberations with goddess Yogamaya He sat down on the shore of the Causal Ocean, where Lord Mahavisnu lies in mystic slumber. That great, ever-joyful yogi sat down on a yoga-asana and began to practise yoga there. After 700 years of penance the Universal Lord Mahavisnu appeared to Him. Five-headed Siva then offered many kinds of indescribable praises to Mahavisnu, who replied: "My dear Sadasiva! Why are You trying to please Me by performing such difficult austerities? You and I are one! We differ only in body!" Sadasiva replied: "My dear Lord, unless You empower Me to save suffering mankind, how can I do it?" Then Mahavisnu embraced Sadasiva and thus They assumed one captivating, radiant golden form in which They would appear, roaring out 'krsna! krsna!'
Then a most amazing divine voice resounded in the sky, proclaiming: "Listen, O Mahavisnu! First descend in the womb of Labha-devi in this form— later I will personally descend in Nadiya. You will then find Me in the abode of Saci and Jagannatha. Balarama and all the other devotees will also all take birth there to redeem the conditioned souls." Hearing this, Mahavisnu became one with Siva and together they entered the womb of Labha-devi in Santipura.”
In his previous birth Kuvera Pandita was the celestial treasurer Kuvera, the head of the Guhyakas, or ghostly followers of Lord Siva. As he was a loyal disciple of Lord Siva, Dhanapati Kuvera had performed penances with mantras to attain the Lord as his son, and the Lord blessed him by making him his father in his appearance on earth as Sri Advaita Acarya. This is beautifully described by Srila Kavi Karnapura in his Gaura Ganoddesa Dipika (81-85):

mahadevasya mitram yah kuvero guhyakesvarah;
kuvera panditah so'dya janako'sya vidambarah
purah kuverah kailase siddha sadhya nisevite;
jajapa paramam mantram saivam sri siva vallabhah
tato dayalu bhagavan varam vrnviti so'bravit;
tada kuvero varayamasa tvam me suto bhava
prarthitas tena deveso varadeso sadasivah;
janmanyantare putrah prapsyami putratam tava
iti prapya varam kastam kiyantam kalam asthitah;
karyad isavasat so'dyadvaitasya janakobhavat

"Mahadeva's friend Kuvera, the master of the Guhyakas, appeared in Gaura-lila as Advaita Prabhu's father Kuvera Pandita. Previously, on Mount Kailasa, where all perfections and accomplishments reside, Kuvera, who is very dear to Sri Siva, practised japa of the greatest Siva-mantra. The merciful Lord Siva then said: "Accept a benediction from Me." Kuvera then asked the following boon: "Please become my son (in Gaura-lila)." Being thus petitioned, the god of gods and the master of all benefactors, told Kuvera: "In the next life I will take the position of your son." Thus Kuvera attained a precious benediction. When the proper time had come, he became the father of Advaita, by the wish of Lord Siva."

vraja avesa-rupatvad vyuho yo'pi sadasivah;
sa evadvaita gosvami caitanyabhinna vigrahah

"Lord Sadasiva, who appeared in Vraja-lila in an expansion or avesa-form, has now (in Gaura-lila) appeared as Advaita Gosvami, who is non-different from Sri Caitanya." (Gaura Ganoddesa Dipika, 76)
Furthermore there are many references given in Caitanya Bhagavata of Lord Advaita as Lord Shiva.

could this mean hes visnu tattva

I dont believe it is so easy to classify Sadashiva like that. It is proven earlier in this thread that he is situated in the spiritual sky, but that does not imply that he is Vishnu Tattva. Notice the isvaranam vacah satyam verse in the Bhagavata (10.33.30), which mentions Shiva (yatharudro'bdhijam visham) as one of the Ishvaras. I believe Sadashiva is quantitatively equal to Vishnu, but is a separate tattva. I know that is a hard one to digest for some Vaishnavas......

what is meant by 'quantitatively equal to Vishnu'. what tattva is he and what are the properties of his tattva ( sorry if im asking too many questions )

how about the stuff on anga in cc adi 6. is the context fitting to interpret anga as amsa for sadasiva

btw, who are Laudiya Krishnadas and Ishan Nagara

---

to me this sounds similar to cc adi 6.10. similar, but i dont know if its the same thing

se puruñera aàça—advaita, nähi kichu bheda
çaréra-viçeña täìra—nähika viccheda (CC Adi 6.10)

Çré Advaita Äcärya is a plenary part of that puruña and so is not different from Him. Indeed, Çré Advaita Äcärya is not separate but is another form of that puruña

Laudiya Krsna dasa was King Divyasimha, whose minister Advaita Prabhu's father had been. He later handed over the kingdom to his son and went to Santipura. After he embraced Vaisnavism his name became Krsna dasa and since he had been the king of Lauda, he became known as Laudiya. He knew all about the childhood-pastimes of Advaita Prabhu and recorded them in the book called 'Balya Lila Sutram' which was written in 1488 and consists of 333 Sanskrit slokas.
Isana Nagara was a direct disciple of Sri Advaita Prabhu. He was born in 1493 and initially lived in Nava Grama in the Lauda-county of Sri Hatta district. When he was 5 years old his widowed mother took him along and took shelter of Advaita Prabhu's house. Advaita Prabhu educated him. Thus he is a reliable eye-witness to the pastimes of Sri Advaita Acarya. Apart from his personal testimonies, Advaita Prakasa is also based on what Isana Nagara heard from Advaita Prabhu's second son Krsna Misra Gosvami, Bhagavata Acarya Syama dasa and Padmanabha Cakravarti, the father of Sri Lokanatha Gosvami.



He is situated beyond the material world and is therefore a transcendental reality, unlike the demigods.



Here the purusa refers to Mahavishnu (see verse 7), though the words 'saksad isvara' in verse 6 could well hint at Sadashiva.

OM Namah Shivaya!

I believe that Shiva is the same supreme personality that Sri Krishna or Vishnu. You can see this at Brahma Samhita:

ksiram yatha dadhi vikara-viseesa-yogat
sanjayate na hi tatah prthag asti hetoh
yah sambhutam api tatha samupaiti karyad
govidam adi-purusam tam aham bhajami

"I worship Govind, the primeval Lord. just as milk changes into Yogurt when mixed with yogurt culture but is actually constitutionally nothing but milk, so Govinda, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, assumes the form of Lord Shiva for the especial purpose of material transactions."

Your servant,
Ishvarananda Das

se puruñera aàça—advaita, nähi kichu bheda
çaréra-viçeña täìra—nähika viccheda (CC Adi 6.10)
how maha visnu says himself & sadasiva differ only in body, i think thats similar to how cc adi 6.10 says sarira visesa. whats the sanskrit in Balya Lila Sutra & Advaita Prakash for "...Mahavisnu, who replied: 'My dear Sadasiva! Why are You trying to please Me by performing such difficult austerities? You and I are one! We differ only in body!' " ?

---

like how anga is taken as amsa for advaita in cc adi 6 (& narayan in sb 10.14.14), can that also be done for sadasiva being called anga in bhagavatamrta kana 6 & laghu bhagavatamrta 31?

Unfortunately I dont have a copy of Balyalila Sutra anymore. Perhaps Nitai or Jagat, if they are reading this thread, could help out by sending me scans of this small book, if they indeed have a copy? Advaita Prakash is not a Sanskrit, but Bengali booklet. Verses 11 and 12 of chapter 1 run as follows:

mahavishnu kohe tuhu noho ara keho;
tora mora eka atma bhinna matra deho
eto kohi pancanane koila alingana;
dui deho eka hoilo ke jane tara mana

Mahavishnu said: "You are no one else (but Me), You and Me are One Soul; there is only difference in Our bodies." Saying this, He embraced Pancanana (five headed Shiva) and Their two bodies became one. Who knows Their minds?



This means that Advaita does not differ from Mahavishnu.



We can only speculate about that, but there can be different angles of view between Rupa Gosvami and the authors of Advaita's biographies. Mind you, like Krishna Sandarbha, Laghu Bhagavatamrita was written especially to establish Krishna as the Supreme, so all verses will aim at that.

oh!, woops, i assumed wrong . thx for verses 11 & 12 of chapter 1

advaita doesnt differ from mahavisnu exactly like (or only similarly like?) sadasiva doesnt differ! right? ( i know, speculation )


ya speculate, how bout we speculate towards best guess/most likely possibility

here goes some speculation-

expansion wise is anga used to indicate anything other than amsa ?

and what is disqualifying sadasiva from being visnu tattva, is it just that theres not much info about him and so it cant be conclusively said

not sure why this was mentioned, but ok ill keep that in mind

Out of great love for Him, devotees of Krishna will do everything to establish Krishna as the sole and supreme overlord. The actual truth of Shiva tattva, however, may be a little more complicated than that He is either a mere demigod or even an Amsha of Vishnu. Note the 2nd offence to the chanting of the holy name - shivasya sri vishnor ya iha guna namadi sakalam dhiya bhinnam pashyed sa khalu harinamahitakarah - "Anyone who sees difference between the attributes, names etc of Shiva and Sri Vishnu is certainly doing harm to the holy name of Hari." Again, as I said before "isvaranam vacah satyam" (SB 10.33.30) The words of the Ishvaras (plural) are true - 'yatha rudro'bdhijam', one of the Isvaras being Shiva.

in this regard, ill copy paste something from locana das thakur's caitanya mangala & murari gupta's krsna caitanya carita mahakavya.

the versions im copy pasting are both from http://gauranga1.tripod.com

caitanya mangala (the version didnt have any reference #'s):

Once Damodara Pandita asked Murari Gupta, "Murari, why did Lord Caitanya accept the nirmalya [prasada] of Lord Siva? According to a curse of Bhrgu Muni, Siva's prasada is not acceptable. Yet why did Gauranga accept it? Mahaprabhu is Himself the Lord of the brahmanas. So, why did He violate the Vedic injunctions?
Murari Gupta said, "Listen, Damodara. How can I know the mind of the Lord? I'll answer you according to my understanding. If you find it acceptable, then take it into your heart. If someone differentiates between Hari [Krishna} and Hara [Siva] when he worships Lord Siva, and therefore refuses to accept Siva's prasada, he Commits an offense and suffers the curse of Bhrgu Muni.
"Why? Because his consciousness is contaminated. He doesn't understand the glories of Lord Siva. But he who accepts both Hari and Hara as one, and faithfully accepts Siva's prasada becomes beloved to both Lord Krishna and Siva.
"One certainly pleases Lord Siva with his food offerings, if he remembers that Lord Siva is the greatest Vaisnava. One becomes free from material bondage by taking such remnants. Actually, when Lord Siva saw Lord Caitanya taking his darsana, he joyfully accepted Gauranga as his guest.
"The curse of Bhrgu is meant for materialists devoid of Krishna consciousness. If someone worships Lord Siva in a friendly mood, he certainly develops his love for Sri Krishna. Sri Gauranga Mahaprabhu came to teach the proper path of perfection for people in general ."
Damodara Pandita said, "Murari, you have kindly removed all my misgivings, and made everyone else happy too."
Thus Locana Dasa describes the transcendental pastimes of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu


krsna caitanya carita mahakavya, Ninth Sarga, Third Prakrama (to shorten the post i took out some of the word-for-word thingys):

etan niçamya devasya / çiva-nirmmälya-bhakaëam
pratyuväca mahä-tejäù / çré-dämodara-paëòitaù 8

näçnäti çiva-devasya / nirmmälya bhgu-çäpataù
katha jïätvä sa bhagavän / bubhuje tan narottamaù 9

tat çrutvä präha viprendra / muräriù çrüyatäm iti
kathä çré-çiva-devasya / nirmmälyämta-bhakaëe 10

vastutas tu mahädevaù / çré-këasya çubhägame
ätithya vidadhe haräö / tena kiïca para çëu 11

vaiëava-çreöha-buddhyä ye / püjayanti maheçvaram
tair ddatta ghëate so 'pi / tad anna pävana mahat 12

When the powerful brähmaëa Çré Dämodara Paëita heard that the Lord had eaten the remnants of Çiva's food, He said:

"One should not eat the remnants of Lord Çiva because Bhågu Muni has placed a curse on those who worship him. Why then did the all-opulent transcendental Lord, knowing this, eat that food?"

Hearing this, Muräri replied to the noble vipra, "Hear from me the reason for which the Lord ate those nectarean remnants of Çré Çiva-deva." When Çré Kåñëa Caitanya made His auspicious arrival, Mahädeva joyously accepted Him as an honored guest. Please hear somewhat further. When bhaktas worship Mahädeva thinking of him as the best among vaiñëavas, Mahçvara accepts that offering from them, and that food should be considered great and pure prasäda.

çré-këa-këa-bhaktänä / bheda-buddhyä patanty adhaù
durvvairän çikayas täç ca / bhakta-rüpaù svaya hariù 13

çré-këa-këa-bhaktänäm - of Kåñëa and Kåñëa's devotees; bheda - of differentiation; buddhyä - with a mentality; patanti - they fall; adhaù - down; durvairän - inimical persons; çikayan - teaching; tän - them; ca - and; bhakta-rüpaù - in the form of a devotee; svayam - in person; hariù - the remover of sin.

Those who in a sectarian spirit differentiate between Sré Kåñëa and his bhaktas indeed fall down. Çré Hari personally advented in the form of a bhakta as Caitanya Mahäprabhu in order to instruct such inimical persons.

äcaryyaty api deveço / hita-kt sarvva-dehinäm
nirmmälyäm ädareëaiva / ghétvä jagad-éçvaraù 14

The Lord of all gods, who is the supreme controller of the cosmic manifestation, certainly seeks to benefit all embodied beings. Thus, by His reverential acceptance of Çré Çiva's food-remnants, He teaches them by His example.

janaiù sasthäpite liìge / bheda-buddhyä ca püjite
tatraiva çäpo viprasya / nahi syäd aikyataù kvacit 15

janaiù - by the people; sasthäpite - established; liìge - the sacred phallus; bheda-buddhyä - with a mentality of differentiation; ca - and; püjite - worshipped; tatra - then; eva - certainly; çäpa - the curse; viprasya - of the learned brähmaëa; nahi - certainly not; syät - it can be; aikyataù - in oneness; kvacit - sometimes.

Wherever the liìgam is established and worshipped with a conception that Çré Çiva and Çré Hari have separate parties, there Bhgu's curse will act, because of this offense of a dualistic concept.

hari-çaìkarayor aikya / svayambhü-liìga-sannidhau
abheda-buddhyä püjäyä / nahi çäpo bhavet kvacit 16

hari-çaìkarayo - of Hari and Çaìkara; aikyam - oneness; svayambhü - self-born; liìga - form; sannidhau - in the place; abheda - of not differentiating; buddhyä - because of the mentality; püjäyäm - in the worship; nahi - there is not; çäpa - the curse; bhavet - can be; kvacit - at all.

Hari and Çaìkara have one interest. If in the presence of a Çiva liìgam someone worships Them without a dualistic concept, the curse will not have effect.

tena taträdhikä prétir / hari-çaìkarayor bhavet
abhede 'tra svayambhau ca / püjä sarvvätiçäyiné 17

tena - for that reason; tatra - there; adhikä - more; préti - love; hari-çaìkarayo - of Hari and Çaìkara; bhavet - it may be; abhede - in non-differentiation; atra - here; svayambhau - for Lord Çiva; ca - and; püjä - worship; sarva - all; atiçäyiné - increasing.

By people understand Their unity of interest, love will increase for both Hari and Çaìkara, and worship for Them both will increase.

mahä-prasäda tatraiva / bhuktvä mokam aväpnuyät
mahä-rogät pramucyeta / sthira-sampattim äpnuyät 18

ye mohät tan na khädanti / te bhavanty aparädhinaù
harau çive ca niùçrékä / rogiëaç ca bhavanti te 19

vaiëavaiù püjito yatra / çré-çivaù paramädarät
anädi-liìgam äsädya / çré-këa-préti-hetave 20

tatraiva saçayo nästi / nirmmälya-grahaëe kvacit
bhaktir eva sadä vipra / çubha-dä sarvva-dehinäm 21

By tasting such mahä-prasäda one can attain liberation, be cured from terrible diseases, and obtain undisturbed prosperity. Those who out of delusion do not eat such mahä-prasäda become offenders to both Hari and Çiva. They become diseased and bereft of opulence. Wherever the beginningless liìgam of Çré Çiva is worshipped with great respect by vaiñëavas in order to develop love for Çré Kåñëa, there will be no doubt about accepting the remnants of Çré Çiva's food. O vipra, such devotional service is verily auspicious for all embodied beings.

Thus ends the Ninth Sarga entitled "Gaura Hari Honors the Food Remnants of Çré Çiva," in the Third Prakrama of the great poem Çré Caitanya Carita

http://mandala.com.au/chaitanya_bhagavat/ant2.htm

cb antya chap 2

....I will now describe from the Skanda Purana how Lord Siva found this place. Lord Siva and his consort, Parvatidevi, were living contentedly in Kasi for a very long time. Then they went to Kailasa and left Kasi to be ruled by kings. Soon a king named Kasiraja ascended the throne. He was an ardent worshiper of Lord Siva. Suddenly by the will of destiny he lost everything in a war. He was determined to destroy his victor in battle, Sri Krishna. With vengence in his heart he sat down to perform the most terrible of austerities, meditating on Lord Siva. Lord Siva, attracted to appear before him by the potency of his austerity, offered him to choose any boon. Kasiraja eagerly asked, "I pray only for this boon from you, my lord, that I may avenge my defeat and destroy Krishna in battle." Lord Siva is a magnanimous personality. No one can say how he will grace someone with his favor. He said to Kasiraja, "O King prepare for battle. My army of followers will be right behind you in the field. Let me see who is strong enough to defeat you as long as I am behind you with my weapon Pasupati."

Reassured by Siva's words, the foolish King Kasiraja went to battle against Krishna, smiling confidently. Lord Siva, accompanied by his associates and followers, followed the army of Kasiraja. His intention was to fight for the king. Krishna, the Supersoul situated within everyone's heart, could know immdiately what was happening. He swiftly sent His disc weapon, Sudarsana, to destroy the enemy. The Lord's Sudarsana disc is invincible, so unchallenged it went straight to Kasiraja and severed his head from his body. Then Sudarsana started destroying the city of Varanasi, the capitol of Kasiraja. This enreged Lord Siva. Seeing that his abode was being plundered, he released his terrible Pasupati weapon. What can any other weapon, however powerful, do against Sudarsana? The Pasupati weapon quickly retreated in fear. Sudarsana then went after Lord Siva himself. Lord Siva fled from the awesome weapon. The power and heat from the Sudarsana covered the whole world, and Siva had no place to hide. Lord Siva found himself in the same predicament as the sage Durvasa when he was being chased by the fearsome weapon

Lord Siva finally understood that he was being preyed upon by the Sudarsana disc, and that only Lord Krishna could hep him out of his dilema. Then , making his decision, he remembered Lord Krishna, taking shelter at His lotus feet. He began to offer prayers to the Lord,..............

.............

The Lord was very pleased with Siva's words and He embraced him firmly saying, " Hear Me, O Siva. You are as precious to Me as My own body. One who is dear to you is even more dear to Me. I reside always within you, there is no doubt about this. I allow you to stay in all My abodes. In fact, you are the protector and maintainer of all the Dhams. And this place known as ekamra vana I am giving to you. Stay here and make it your home. This place is also My favorite. I will be pleased if you stay here always. One who claims to be My devotee but disregards you is only trying to pretend devotion to Me." This is how Lord Siva came to reside in this fsmous place, Bhuvanesavra. It is still existing


im getting off topic here but the part i highlighted in brown is similar to what krsna as rama says in tulsi ramayan:

http://gitapress.org/books/ramayan/1318/la...anka805-889.pdf

When the All-merciful saw the exceedingly beautiful construction of the bridge, He smiled and observed thus: "This is a most delightful and excellent spot; its glory is immeasurable and cannot be described in words. I will install (an emblem of) Lord Sambhu here: it is the crowning ambition of My heart." Hearing this the lord of the monkeys despatched a number of messengers, who invited and fetched all the great sages. Having installed an emblem of Lord Siva and worshipped It with due solemnity, He said, "No one else is so dear to Me as Siva. An enemy of Siva although he calls himself a devotee of Mine, cannot attain to Me even in a dream. He who is opposed to Sankara and yet aspires for devotion to Me is doomed to perdition, stupid and dull-witted as he is."

"Men, who, though devoted to Sankara, are hostile to Me and even so those who are enemies of Siva but votaries of Mine shall have their abode in the most frightful hell till the end of creation."

"They who will behold Lord Ramesvara will, on quitting the body, go direct to My sphere in heaven. And a man who takes the water of the Ganga and pours it on the Lord will attain liberation in the form of absorption into My being. Again, whosoever adores the Lord in a disinterested spirit and without guile will be blessed by Sankara with devotion to Me. And he who sees the bridge erected by me will be able to cross the ocean of worldly existence without any exertion."

how about the stuff on anga in cc adi 6. is the context fitting to interpret anga as amsa for sadasiva

http://bhagavatam.net/8/7

tad ugra-vegaà diçi diçy upary adho
visarpad utsarpad asahyam aprati
bhétäù prajä dudruvur aìga seçvarä
arakñyamäëäù çaraëaà sadäçivam (19)

vilokya taà deva-varaà tri-lokyä
bhaväya devyäbhimataà munénäm
äsénam adräv apavarga-hetos
tapo juñäëaà stutibhiù praëemuù (20)

O King, when that uncontrollable poison was forcefully spreading up and down in all directions, all the demigods, along with the Lord Himself, approached Lord Çiva [Sadäçiva]. Feeling unsheltered and very much afraid, they sought shelter of him. The demigods observed Lord Çiva sitting on the summit of Kailäsa Hill with his wife, Bhaväné, for the auspicious development of the three worlds. He was being worshiped by great saintly persons desiring liberation. The demigods offered him their obeisances and prayers with great respect


mukhäni païcopaniñadas taveça
yais triàçad-añöottara-mantra-vargaù
yat tac chiväkhyaà paramätma-tattvaà
deva svayaà-jyotir avasthitis te (29)

O lord, the five important Vedic mantras are represented by your five faces, from which the thirty-eight most celebrated Vedic mantras have been generated. Your Lordship, being celebrated as Lord Çiva, is self-illuminated. You are directly situated as the supreme truth, known as Paramätmä

---

to my unlearned neophyte calculations of these verses it looks like they say sadasiva is paramatma

any comments

The principle of the Supreme Self is known as Shiva. Seems correct.

Above the gunas. I don't know if this can be applied to Sadasiva but I found something in CC:


http://vedabase.net/cc/madhya/20/311/en

'ziva' — mAyA-zakti-saGI, tamo-guNAveza
mAyAtIta, guNAtIta 'visNuh' — parameza

Lord ziva is an associate of the external energy; therefore he is absorbed in the material quality of darkness. Lord visNuh is transcendental to mAyA and the qualities of mAyA. Therefore He is the Supreme Personality of Godhead

Ok. It seems to me, the qualifying principle here for being paramesa is being above the gunas. So that would make Sadasiva Visnu tattva!?!?

I think I'm just speculating here.

Some verses from Brihad Bhagavatamrita on Shiva. Don't have the original language transliterations to post.


http://www.mandala.com.au/brhad/2_3.htm

2.3.

58-9 "Conquered by the devotion of his friend Kuvera, from his own abode, which is like himself, and which is attained by the devotion of they who see that Lord Shiva and Lord Krsna are not different, he is now going, along with his beloved Parvati and his many associates, to decorate Mount Kailasa."
60 Sri Gopa-kumara said: Hearing this, I became happy, and I desired to get the blissful mercy of Lord Shiva.
61 Understanding my heart, Lord Shiva gave a meaningful glance to Nandi. Nandi then explained to me the pure truth, which was at once manifested before me.
Srila Sanatana Gosvami explains that the fact that Lord Krsna and Lord Shiva are not different was the truth manifested to Gopa-kumara.
62 The truth was that Lord Shiva, who increases one's love for Lord Krsna, is not different from Lord Madana-Gopala, my Lord, who is more dear to me than life.
63 I happily joined their company and all of Lord Shiva's associates treated me well. From Sri Nandi I heard of Lord Shiva's extraordinary glories.
64 Always in the same form, Lord Shiva stays in his own abode eternally. There he is always seen by his devotees, who have faith in him alone, and who are pleased to stay in his abode.
65 He is always filled with devotion for Lord Krsna, who is not different from him. With singing, dancing, and other pastimes he delights his associates.
66 Although he is the Lord of the universes, Lord Shiva always worships thousand-headed Lord Sesa with great love, as if he were His servant.
Srila Sanatana Gosvami explains that this is described in Srimad-Bhagavatam 5.17.16
67 Even though I became very happy to hear of the supreme glories of Shivaloka, still I noticed that my heart felt empty.
Srila Sanatana Gosvami explains that Gopa-kumara still yearned to see the lotus feet of Lord Madana-Gopala.
68 Thinking about the reason for this, by the power of my service to the mantra my guru gave, I suddenly understood.
69 The absence of the pastimes and glories of Lord Madana-Gopala's lotus feet gave me pain.
70 Then I told my mind that because he is the same as Lord Madana-Gopala, Lord Shiva himself has performed these wonderful pastimes, although in a different form.
71-2 Seeing it was still unhappy, I said to my mind: Although you have not yet seen in Lord Shiva the sweetness of Lord Madana-Gopala's form and other glories, still, your long-cherished desire to see them will certainly be fulfilled by Lord Shiva's mercy


http://www.mandala.com.au/brhad/2.html

1.2.

92 Sri Brahma said: Submissive to the loving service of Kuvera, Shiva resides in Kuvera's place on Mount Kailasa in the material universe.
93 Assuming the role of the protector of the northern direction, Shiva resides there, surrounded by his associates, and keeping very little material wealth.
94 The Supreme Personality of Godhead Krishna becomes conquered by the loving service of devotees like myself, and for this reason He resides on my planet, on Svargaloka, and in many other places as well, and enjoys suitable pastimes there. (In the same way Shiva resides in Kailasa because of the devotion of Kuvera.)
95 I quote the opinion of Vayu Purana
"The planet of Shiva is beyond the seven-fold coverings of the material world. It is eternal, transcendental, and full of bliss. Only the greatest servants of Shiva may enter it."
96 In that place Shiva is decorated with splendid transcendental garments and ornaments. There He is the master of great powers and opulences, and there he is surrounded by many associates as splendid and glorious as he.
97 In that place, even though the two of them are not different, Shiva worships the supremely powerful and opulent Lord Sankarsana as his chosen Deity. Is this not very wonderful?

In the Bhagvat book 4 chapter 6 and book 8 chapter 7 Shiva is talked about. Sridhar Svami's Bhagvat commentary is available in sanskrit at the Maharishi University website. Anyone interested in seeing what he says and translating to here?

I can read some numbers. If I read them right his commentary for 4.6 should be on page 72 of the pdf here:

http://ff.mum.edu/vedicreserve/puranas/bhagavatapurana02.pdf

And for 8.7 on page 68 here:

http://ff.mum.edu/vedicreserve/puranas/bhagavatapurana04.pdf

The word "therefore" isn't there in the text. Therefore, you can't really deduct a criteria like that from the text. [That aside, there is no question of Vishnu's being Vishnu because of a reason.] If Vishnu is someone who is beyond the gunas, it doesn't mean that everyone who is beyond the gunas is automaticaly also Vishnu. For example, Vishnu's companions are above maya and the gunas, yet they are not Vishnu.

Therefore I was mistaken. There

Advaita's and Shiva's Associates


http://vedabase.net/cc/adi/6/32/en

Izvara-sArUpya pAya pAriSada-gaNa
catur-bhuja, pIta-vAsa, yaiche nArAyaNa

His associates have the same bodily features as the Lord. They all have four arms and are dressed in yellow garments like Narayana


http://www.mandala.com.au/brhad/3.html

1.3.

21-3 When a demon named Bana, who was your devotee, who was very proud of the strength of his arms, and who brought many troubles to the saintly devotees, captured and bound Aniruddha with his mystic power, he fought with Lord Krishna, the holder of the cakra. Losing the fight with the Lord, Bana was almost dead, but he was saved by you, who prayed that his life be spared. Lord Krishna at once stopped from killing him, became pleased with him, and gave him a form like His own. Then He made him your personal associate, a state even the demigods cannot attain

I am searching for and compiling parts of sastras, quotes about Shiva and Sri Krsna (Vishnu) and their interrelated position.

It is very interesting work.

I stumbled upon a quote below, perhaps anyone has seen it before?
Source maybe?



hariiii bol!

This is from the Hindi work Rama-charita-manasa by Tulsidas, Uttara-khanda. (See here.)


If you are working on putting together a comprehensive and coherent picture of the relationship between the two, you may want to limit your study to the relevant theology within a particular tradition, as there is no guarantee whatsoever that different traditions would view the relationship in a similar manner.

I see.
Thank you.
Lots of relevant info therein...

And at the link target as well


Yes, Im aware of that.
I'm only starting this project, it is quite appealing and yet challenging.
I will limit myself only to our vasihnava tradition. It is invain to try to find relevant info in iskcon texts...or so it seems to me...
It is ok, though. no problem.

I also took a glimpse at Shankaracarya work just now, but I think I will be fishing in vaishnavism...

So far I have included parts of:
- srimad bhagavatam
- caitanya caritamrita
- Purana (padma, Brahma Vaivarta, skanda, Vayu, vishnu...)
- Laghu Bhagavatamrita
- Caitanya Bhagavata
- Sri Brahma Samhita

I haven't even touched Sri Advaita Prakasa and Sri Caitanya Mangala yet...


Oh, anyone willing to help, don't be afraid to post relevant texts and sources in this thread...


hariiii bol!

I have been interested in Lord Shiva much of my devotional life. I don't really understand the purpose of the thread however, at least in context of Rupanuga Vaisnavism. The identity of Sri Shiva by default cannot go beyond that of Demigod (or a vague idea of transcendent entity) in Vaisnava treatise. The most progressive understandings were indeed given by Srila Sanatana Gosvami, and I have read a similar understanding elaborated upon in brief by BR Sridhar Maharaja in a conversation with ACBS, wherein Sadashiva is described as sort of Vishnu prototype transcendent yet different than the Mahadeva of the universe as described in BB.

Vaisnavas and Shaivas, especially Shaiva Siddhantins, have subtly interchanged theology for (at least) the last 1500 years. The Alwars echo the Navalars sentiments of devotion, and later Meykandar sounds at times like the earlier Ramanuja in his theological presentation. 1000 yeas ago Hari-hara, as well as Surya-Narayana and other combination deities were worshipped as a sythesis of the prominent understandings of the day. I suppose a Shaiva would respond to this thread that Vishnu is an aspect of Shiva Tattva. Point being, if one wants to understand Shiva Tattva, why not consider what Shaivas have to say in addition to Vaisnava sources? Just a thought .

Yes.
Sastras say othervise, but ok, each to its own, I guess...



Well, I can only speak for myself, and from where I stand, devotional service is the path I am interested in, not anything else (described in various shankaracarya works).

The attached text, excerpted from the upcoming edition of Madhurya-kadambini, should be of interest in this regard. I believe it is the most elaborate Gaudiya explanation of Shiva-tattva there is in the writings of the acharyas.

[attachmentid=1782]
The commentary hasn't been included. If some points are unclear, ask and we'll see if the commentary clarifies.

Yes, that was my point actually ...


I'm curious what you mean by this statement-that perhaps you follow works of Shankar that agree with your devotional sentiments, or you are not interested in Shankar? I'm just curious why you brought up Shankar (perhaps I missed something earlier in the thread)?

Yep.
I am on your side on this, free will is important and I go along with yours.




Hmm.
I brought up Shankar because I checked His work for compilation I work on and it seemd to me that somehow does not
fit into bkakti yoga path.
I may be wrog, mind you.

As for my interests...hmm... my direct interest is serving my Gurudev and Sri Krsna in a way that is pleasing to Him.

Does this answer your question, angrezi, please?

Uuuuuu

Hariii bol, hariii bol, hariii bol!


I will look into it, ASAP (not now).

Did you know that I just exchanged emails with Advaita Das regarding digital edition of Madhurya-kadambini?

I wanted to include texts into my compilation, but he says he doesnt distribute digital books...
And now, here you post it!

hariii bol

thank you, thank you.

I will ask for commentary if I lose the track, thank you.

hariiii bol!

I also do not distribute digital editions of books. What you find in the attached file is a brief excerpt containing the relevant part from the text.

Yes, thank you .