Sharaba Upanishad which mentions Lord Sharabha is a muktika canon 108 Upanishad and it comes at number 50 snd there are many hymns and stotras dedicated to it in Tattariya Arayanayaka and also in other Vedic literatures
Pls clear my doubt
Adiyen
Sharabha Upanishad
Updated on March 27, 2024 in
Holy Books
- Liked by
Srimathe Rangaramanuja Mahadesikaya Namaha
Srimathe Sri Varaha Mahadesikaya Namaha
Sri Velukkudi Krishnan Swamy Thiruvadigaley Sharanam
Moksham Dadathi Mukunda:
Nobody else has the powers to give mukti except Mukundan.
Please read my previous response to your question.
There was an alwar like you, who was a Tapasvi, learnt Sikhism (Sakkiyam), Samanam (Jainism), Buddism (Boudham), Sankara (Shaivam) and lived 4000+ years just to find this our:
Baagiyam (My fortune) to know Lord Venkateswara is my solace.
Shiva after pleased with Alwar’s Tapas came to help the Alwar
Alwar just asked a simple question
“Can you give me mukti”?
Shiva said: Except Mukti ask me anything because that’s not my department. Shiva also conferred Alwar the title “Bhakthi SArar” (epitome of Bhakthi) and paved way to allow Hari Bhakthi.
Is Hari Bhakthi so easy to get?
Dhurlabam Manusham Janma (Sri Krishna Premi Swamigal). To get this human form is a rarity. In that getting Sri Hari Bhakthi is a treasure hunt.
Not sure what is “Muktika Canon” referred by you. I suggest you one thing, go to Shiva, he will advise you Rama nama then come back here.
Dasanudasan
Srimathe Rangaramanuja Mahadesikaya Namaha
The topics of our interest
Vishnu, Narada, Padma, Garuda, Varaha and Bhagavata are Satvika Puranas.
Dasanudasan
To feed your curiosity
Is the notion of sattvik, tamasic and rajasic puranas genuine?
Excerpts from this link:
https://hinduism.stackexchange.com/questions/22366/is-the-notion-of-sattvik-tamasic-and-rajasic-puranas-genuine
“Actually Ramanuja was a Vaishnava. Shaivas consider Vaishnava puranas as Tamasic. This is based on what Brahmaji said in Rudra Samhita of the Shiva Purana itself which claims to be the greatest of all Puranas. Vishnu is stated as only a demi-god on the same level as Rudra. While Shiva is free from all Gunas. And Vishnu is not only on the same level as Rudra, he is called Tamasic. Also Laxmi is called Tamasic.”
Vishnu is waste. Why pay heed to him? He is Demi God, Useless, Good for nothing.
Dasanudasan
Srimathe Rangaramanuja Mahadesikaya Namaha
Refutation
Excerpts from this link:
https://www.unp.me/threads/why-are-so-many-hindus-unaware-of-the-concept-of-nirguna-brahma.284163/
Sri Krishna Premi Swamy Thiruvadigaley Sharanam
Thanks to Sri Krishna Premi Swamy for reminding me this shloka from Veda
Oh dear thinkers!
“Tamasa paramo dhatha shanku chakra gadha dhara:”
First of all, let us appreciate all veda vakyas. Let us not be one sided. Veda says, Narayana is above the Thamasa unknown region with shanku chakram & gadha. He came down as Kannan. Nirgunam = Not wordly gunas Sagunam = All Kalyana gunas. Worldly Gunas = Satvam, Rajasam Tamasam (Sarva dharmaan parithyajya) Kalyana Gunas = Sarvantharyami, SarvaShakthan, SarvaThanthraSwathanthran, Sowlabhyam, Sowseelyam … to top it all Dayaa towards us. Got it? Even great like Adi Shankara can realize Krishna. Looks like we thinkers are greater than Shankarar the Original Advaiti.??? We are so special because we think Veda itself is contradictory. 🙂 WoW what a pure knowledge we possess. We are so intelligent to say Brahmam is next to nothing. Why don’t we learn before coming to conclusions?
Source: https://www.unp.me/threads/why-are-so-many-hindus-unaware-of-the-concept-of-nirguna-brahma.284163/
Dasanudasan
- Liked by
Srimathe Rangaramanuja Mahadesikaya Namaha
This link:
https://www.quora.com/How-true-is-the-epic-where-Lord-Shiva-incarnates-as-Sharabha-and-Lord-Vishnu-as-Gandaberunda
How true is the epic where Lord Shiva incarnates as Sharabha and Lord Vishnu as Gandaberunda?
“I belive in itihasa more than puranas and as per rule itihas has more authenticy over any damn purana and as per both mahabhartha and ramyana narsimbha is causeless bhrahman himself with no origin and end so tell me how can he die the narsimbha tapani upanishad itself call him lord of death and causeless originless and look if sharbha avtara is authentic so why their is no meintion of him in itihasa which he wasnt and remeber that as well that 6 major puranas also says that infact it was lord narsimbha who killed sarbha not the opposite and i have seen someone so called vedantis quoting sarbha upansihad which is completely bogus i mean it says that sarbha kill 4 avtara of hari along with narsimbha swami can you belive it which granth says that lmao and this particular upanishad hasnt been quoted by ancient vedantis which question its authencity..
Conclusion-narimsbha cant be killed cause he is parabhrhman causeless originless and this sarbha story was indeed created to counter the enhanced popularity of narsimbha swami..”
Dasanudasan
- Liked by
Srimathe Rangaramanuja Mahadesikaya Namaha
Even ChatGPT is manipulated by Shaivites because of outnumbering in websites to which AI itself is getting confused.
ChatGPT:
It starts like this…
In the story of Banasura from the Bhagavata Purana, there is no direct mention of Lord Krishna defeating Lord Shiva. Instead, both Krishna and Shiva fought together against Banasura.
Continues like this:
In Hindu mythology and philosophy, the concept of Lord Shiva as the guardian of cosmic balance is derived from various texts, scriptures, and interpretations within the tradition.
Ends like this…
In the story of Banasura, Kartikeya (also known as Skanda or Murugan), who is the son of Shiva, is often depicted as an ally of Banasura, fighting alongside him against Lord Krishna. Therefore, it would be illogical to suggest that Kartikeya fought against his own father, Shiva.
Once again, I apologize for the error in my response and any confusion it may have caused.
Dasanudasan
- Liked by
Deb: I go by book
Vik: Which book?
1) If all Upanishads and Puranas are written by Sri Ved Vyas then why does Sharabha Upanishad, which before I thought as authentic as it comes in the list of 108 Upanishads mentioned in Muktika Upanishad and Sharabha Upanishad has a commentary on it by Sri Yogini Brahmendra and Sringeri Matha (most authentic and oldest matha) of Sri Adi Shankaracharya, use the word killing for Lord Nrsimha whereas Lord Nrsimha is said to have no beginning and no end in Nrsimha Tapaniya Upanishad. Why is there such a stark contrast which is very much confusing for a newbie in spirituality like me. Ply clarify this and enlighten me
In that Upanishad “kill” word is also used for Varaha,Vamana,Matsya and Kurma and Lord Vishnu is called…………….”egoistic” why?
And
2) In Shaiva texts it is said that Lord Shiva granted liberation to all avatars and Lord Vishnu and that he can also give position of Lord Vishnu to anyone and as mentioned above and why do Skanda Purana and Shaiva Puranas call Lord Vishnu …as only outwardly Satwik and Tamasik from inside (I am sorry) and his Puranas as Tamasik why? Which classification of Puranas are correct and how and why? and why do Shaiva texts belittle Lord Vishnu like this?
3) Is there any classification on basis of Rajas Tamas and Satwik of Upanishads like Puranas. Why is there such a stark contrast between Vaishnav Upanishads and Puranas and Shaiva Upanishads and Puranas and why when both are written or compiled by Sri Ved Vyas only and are body parts of Sri Hari and does reading Tamasik texts lead to hell?
Pls clarify all my above questions pls pls pls
Adiyen
Adiyen
1) If all Upanishads and Puranas are written by Sri Ved Vyas then why does Sharabha Upanishad, which before I thought as authentic as it comes in the list of 108 Upanishads mentioned in Muktika Upanishad and Sharabha Upanishad has a commentary on it by Sri Yogini Brahmendra and Sringeri Matha (most authentic and oldest matha) of Sri Adi Shankaracharya, use the word killing for Lord Nrsimha whereas Lord Nrsimha is said to have no beginning and no end in Nrsimha Tapaniya Upanishad. Why is there such a stark contrast which is very much confusing for a newbie in spirituality like me. Ply clarify this and enlighten me
In that Upanishad “kill” word is also used for Varaha,Vamana,Matsya and Kurma and Lord Vishnu is called…………….”egoistic” why?
And
2) In Shaiva texts it is said that Lord Shiva granted liberation to all avatars and Lord Vishnu and that he can also give position of Lord Vishnu to anyone and as mentioned above and why do Skanda Purana and Shaiva Puranas call Lord Vishnu and his consort …as only outwardly Satwik and Tamasik from inside (I am sorry) and his Puranas as Tamasik why? Which classification of Puranas are correct and how and why? and why do Shaiva texts belittle Lord Vishnu like this? But hardcore Vaishnav texts don’t belittle Lord Shiva like this though why?
3) Is there any classification on basis of Rajas Tamas and Satwik of Upanishads like Puranas. Why is there such a stark contrast between Vaishnav Upanishads and Puranas and Shaiva Upanishads and Puranas and why when both are written or compiled by Sri Ved Vyas only and are body parts of Sri Hari and does reading Tamasik texts lead to hell?
also why in Shaiva texts Lord Shiva gave all boon and liberation to Lord Vishnu and his avatars why? And does Llord Vishnu also give liberation to Lord Shiva and his consort and avatars
Pls clarify all my above questions pls pls pls and I want to be a hardcore Vaishnava so pls help a newbie like me in the path of spirituality
Adiyen
- Liked by
Srimathe Rangaramanuja Mahadesikaya Namaha
Swamy,
Your questions are escalated. This forum has learned elders who answered almost all these question.
Request you to search with keywords like “Veda Vyasa” and if not answered please come up here.
You are calling yourself newbie in spirituality but there is no such thing as new or old. We all are learning that’s it
Dasanudasan
- Liked by
Srimathe Rangaramanuja Mahadesikaya Namaha
There was a learned scholar Yadavaprakasa who was a staunch Shaivite and an erstwhile guru of Sri RamanujAchArya.
Yadavaprakasa was comparing Monkey’s rose/pink color back to Vishnu’s color.
Well he proved the level of his thoughts as he can only think of Monkey’s bum.
Sri RamanujaAchArya gave the correct interpretation that words meant lotus 🪷 color not Monkey’s back.
This hurted the sentiments of RamanujaAchArya and finally his Guru Yadavaprakasa himself became his disciple.
Knowledge is power
The Shaivite lost because of Tamasic & Rajasic thought process.
When I think of Monkey’s bum I become Tamasic.When I hate the same monkey & want to harm it I become Rajasic.
Does fighting countries long for peace or war? If fighting is more interesting then why peace treaties?
Shaivites have to uphold their God. So Sringeri or whoever doing their job.
In fact Moksha Pradatvam (apologies for my Sanskrit trying to do better) I.e. the ability to give Moksha is by self surrender to Sriman Narayana through pancha samskaram & BaranyAsam a Vaishnavic ritual is discussed in detail in same SkAnda PurANam why?
My Simple logical question:
1. KaumAram: If Skanda a son of Shiva how can he be supreme without an origi
2. GANApathyam: If Ganapathy is son of Shiva how can alone be Supreme?
3. ShAktham: If Shakthi is wife of Shiva how Devi is Supreme?
4. Shaivam: If Shiva is son of Brahma how can he be supreme?
As these form a political family of their own the only odd man out is Vishnu so he must be supreme 😂
Vishnu is grand father so he must be involved in supremacy scam!!!
Jokes apart Sriman Narayana was accepted by Adi Shankara as supreme.
Sri Krishna when he was born all tied chains were untied. He came to liberate. He does not require liberation. Sriman Narayana is Brahmam.
Why Shiva did not get liberation yet?
May be he is yet to self submit himself to Vishnu. Unless he clings on to his powers, it will not happen.
By the way Brahma , Vishnu (citation required) , Shiva all three are posts refilled by Sriman Narayana the supreme alter of Vishnu himself.
Each Andam universe is monitored by these three fellows. There are multiple universes so it’s a multiverse.
Ref: Srimath BhAgavatham
Dasanudasan
- Liked by
YOUR PREVIEW
0
0