What's better, Vaishnavism or Shaivism?
 Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
 Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
What's better, Vaishnavism or Shaivism?
What's better, Vaishnavism or Shaivism?
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
it depends on your karma and approach to dharma, but shaivism
I prefer streetshittism
Kashmir Shaivism
Vaishnavism. Shaivists have their heads up their own asses and can't explain cosmology
Is there a real difference between the two? From my outside perspective it looks exactly the same except for what the deity's extra arms are holding
I figure both would just be like "cosmology is a metaphor for the oneness that Sai Baba saw while deep in vrashnapraktim yoga" or similar dharmababbel
If you want to read properly Hindu cosmology, read the vedas, upanishads and the "itihasas" which include the ramayana and the mahabharata. The various puranas are later works which place their favorite God above the rest. Ancient Hindu literature is very different in terms of the gods being worshipped and how they were worshipped. The vaishnavists were able to explain their position very well compared to the shaivists whose position is
>dood shiva is the best lmao
along with mysticism sprinkled in. The truest difference is which god is supreme. Vaishnavism is most consistent with the older texts.
The bhakti movement and it's offshoot cults like sai baba's always place more emphasis on faith than righteous conduct or emulating the gods through your actions
Don't they all just say that Shiva and Krishna are the same being? Or is that a Western pop-Hinduism misconception
*Shiva and Vishnu, though they say he's Krishna too
Krishna is the complete incarnation of Vishnu, not Shiva.
Bhagavad Gita: Chapter 11, Verse 15
अर्जुन उवाच |
पश्यामि देवांस्तव देव देहे
सर्वांस्तथा भूतविशेषसङ्घान् |
ब्रह्माणमीशं कमलासनस्थ-
मृषींश्च सर्वानुरगांश्च दिव्यान् || 15||
arjuna uvācha
paśhyāmi devāns tava deva dehe
sarvāns tathā bhūta-viśheṣha-saṅghān
brahmāṇam īśhaṁ kamalāsana-stham
ṛiṣhīnśh cha sarvān uragānśh cha divyān
Aren't they ultimately just different names for the same entity?
No. Thats brahmanism. It conceptualized the Brahman which is the ultimate soul. A lot of ancient Hinduism was polytheistic. The rig veda speaks more about the adventures of Indra. The trimurti are a later development as are the ramayana and mahabharata which the Bhagavad Gita is a part. Vaishnavists hold Vishnu as Supreme like this guy
who is probably Krishna cultist. The shaivites claim that Shiva is Supreme. Brahmanism holds that the Brahman is supreme. You also have Shaktiism that holds that Adi Shakti is the greatest. The shaivites and vaishnavites won the ideological battle. Much like the 100 schools of thought in Chinese history without the bloodshed. The greatest surge for the vaishnavites was the bhakti movement when a number of south Indian monks and philosophers spread the word of Vishnu to the north which was under Muslim rule. Again, spreading the word of Vishnu is not saying it correctly since it implies imposing their supremacy over the other cults when it is in fact a matter of which God you love the most.
Krishna also suffered for his sins in life. As did Rama and the other incarnations of Vishnu. Some incarnations of Vishnu were born due to his moments of weakness or arrogance and was cursed to live a mortal life for a time
>Krishna also suffered for his sins in life
For real? Redpill me on this
He was cursed to die for his role during the Kurukshetra war as well as being a manipulative politician by Gandhari, Dritharashtra's wife who put on a blindfold after she married her husband who was blind. His curse was for being the one who let the Pandavas know the secrets to killing many of the Kauravas. She, being the mother of the Kauravas cursed Krishna's descendants, the Yadavas to go insane and kill each other in their madness. His kingdom, Dwapara was cursed to be swallowed by the ocean and Krishna himself was to be killed by a hunter who mistook him for a deer. Krishna accepts his fate and his sins for allowing the war to happen even though he had the means to nip it all in the bud.
Some morons claim they totally found dwaraka but there's no proof that the city is Dwaraka. Still, the Mahabharata is a great book as is the Ramayana because the characters and their struggle with Dharma is fascinating to read about. Other good characters include Karna, Yudhistira and Duryodhana.
>The shaivites and vaishnavites won the ideological battle
It’s not so much that they won an “ideological battle” through debate or by virtue of having a better philosophy, but rather that they appealed to the ignorant masses. Vaishnavism in particular is intellectually bankrupt. Shaivism less so, but as far as metaphysics and philosophy goes, both fall short of Advaita Vedanta or even Samkhya. Vedic priests and Vaishnavas were getting absolutely btfo by Buddhists long before the bhakti movement. Muslim colonization conditioned the people to prefer a crude devotional religion like Madhva’s Islamic Vedanta or Gaudiya Vaishnavism
Yes you stupid Black person, that's what it means to win. Islam won the battle over zoroastrianism not because of its complexities or intellectualism but because of its appeal to the masses. Christianity won over the hellenes and their philosophy because it appealed to the morons who were prevalent after the crisis of the third century. Your mystic homierdry is bullshit and won't survive the scientific age even though the vaishnavites can explain their way into the modern understanding of the universe unlike the shaivites or the tantric brainlets
Arjun said: O Shree Krishna, I behold within Your body all the gods and hosts of different beings. I see Brahma seated on the lotus flower; I see Shiv, all the sages, and the celestial serpents.
>this means Krishna was Ted Bundy and Bob Berdella
How does Hinduism even articulate the problem of evil? Abraham religions have Satan but it seems impossible for Hinduism to avoid the gods being evil since it's literally true that the most vile child rapist is Krishna
The soul (atman) is similar to that of a lotus flower. When it is a seed, it starts off in the mud (corrupted). But until one realizes one own true nature, does the lotus flower rise against the forces of mud and water, and blossoms at the surface in clear air.
>When it is a seed, it starts off in the mud (corrupted)
And who made it that way?
>But until one realizes one own true nature
Very dumb since you could just be made already knowing this lol. Did you have to learn how to breathe? No? You could come by default with this information as well
super dumb
>you are le dumb
Christian intellectualism as its best.
>>
Both Vaishnavism and Shaivism are aberrations from the core teachings of the Upanishads, which is why both schools rely on outside texts that are not sruti. Vaishnavas have the pancaratra and the writings of the tamil alvars. The Shaivas have the Shaiva agamas. All this extra bullshit because they refuse to accept the true theology of the Upanishads which rejects a personal god. Bhakti is a crutch.
>core teachings of the Upanishads
I'm none of the people that have posted in this thread but I want to ask you, out of curiosity, what would this be?
The Upanishads are not “the Vedas”, but rather make up a specific portion of them, usually at the end of each Veda but not always. The majority of the Vedas is hymns to deities, instructions for ritual practice, and magical mantras to obtain certain results. The earliest form of “Hinduism”, or the “Vedic religion”, is just as schizo as Abrahamic religions like Judaism or Islam. They practiced animal sacrifice, had autistic concepts of “ritual purity”, etc. Salvation/liberation was attained by ritual action (karma). The Upanishads basically turn this upside down. There is even a section in the Chandogya Upanishad that compares those who practice these rituals to dogs. The Upanishads describe Brahman as formless, absolute, infinite consciousness. Every sentient being is Atman, which is identical with Brahman. The implications of this completely undermine the hierarchical caste system and other oppressive social structures. Liberation is attained by knowledge alone. No amount of rituals or devotion will free you from samsara. While these things may be helpful insofar as they condition the mind for knowledge and meditation, they are not necessary.
Saarsis, how many prostrations into where I shake my booty up to the sky and how many times do I need to roll around in cow dung in order to obtain status as yogi? I want to ultimately reincarnate into cow dung based on my enlightened principles in this life saars
Saars answer me, I demand a question to my inquiries, SAAR! How much cow dung do I need to take in so my crypto can go up and now I can be awarded my Visa to Canada? I am broke saars, pls help….saars
SAARS
shaivism by far, all vishnu human incarnations pray, seek approval and knowledge from Shiva before doing anything
Islam BTFOs all of them
>Islam
Lol. Lmao, even. When you’re ready for real philosophy look into Madhyamaka/Vijnanavada Buddhism
Which worship Shiva? Only strongest powerlevel is worthy