31 Oct 2006
[Shri Surya forwarded the comments of a devotee on Shankara, which are: ‘Shankara is Lord Rudra or Shiva, who is produced by the Lord Narayana as per the Veda for the purpose of diverting the demons from devotion to the Lord. Therefore, the philosophy of Shankara is wrong’.]
Some say that even Buddha is atheist to divert the demons from doing sacrifice (Yajna) so that the demons will be powerless. Buddha is the incarnation of Lord Narayana. Therefore, the same blame applies to Narayana also. You say that Rudra is produced by Narayana. But, the Veda also says that Shiva is Narayana by Himself (Shivascha…). You may say that Shiva is different from Rudra. In such case, the Veda says that Rudra is the one God and there is no second God (Eko Rudro Na Dvitiyaya…). Now, this contradicts your Vedic statement that only Narayana is God, who produced Rudra (Eko Ha vai…). This contradiction can be removed only by one way, which is to accept that Narayana and Rudra are one and the same God. When the production of Rudra from Narayana comes, the interpretation should be like this: The word Naryana stands for the Parabrahman (God) existing in the energetic form of Vishnu. The word Rudra means the external energetic form of Rudra. This means that Parabrahman produced all the energetic forms of Rudra, Vishnu etc. The follower of Ramanuja (Vishishta Advaitin) is also equal to the follower of Shankara (Advaitin) in misinterpretations. Rejecting the soul as God is good. But confining to only one energetic form (Narayana) is again bad and the same mistake is done. The soul is in the human body and neither the soul nor the human body is God. Similarly, the external energetic form of Narayana is not God directly. It is as good as the soul or the human body. All these three (soul, human body and energetic form are creation only) are not God. The same applies to the energetic form of Rudra also. But the merit in the energetic forms of Rudra and Narayana is that both can be treated as God since God exists in them. Therefore, in the case of human being, neither the human body nor the soul is God. But in the case of Narayana and Rudra, the energetic form is not God but God is present in those energetic forms. Therefore, such energetic forms in which God exists can be treated as almost God like the live wire treated as current. This does not also mean that every energetic form is an abode of God. Indra is a soul in the energetic form. In the case of Indra, neither the soul nor the external energetic form is God.
You say that Krishna generated Rudra to mislead some devotees in the spiritual path. Krishna is a recent incarnation whereas Rudra exists even before the birth of Krishna. It is said in Bhagavatam that Krishna did penance for Lord Siva. If you say that Narayana is fixed in Lord Vishnu only as a word of Yoga Rudha, then we can also fix words like Siva, Ishwara, Maheswara etc., in Lord Rudra as words of Yoga Rudha. In the Gita spoken by Lord Krishna, the words like Ishwara and Maheshwara exist in the place of God (Ishwara Sarva Bhutanam, Mayinamtu Maheshwaram, Karta Bhokta Maheshwarah etc.,). This means your Lord Krishna Himself accepted that Lord Rudra is God. In the Veda, the word Eesha is used to mean God in the beginning of the Eesavaasya Upanishat.
Shankara diverted atheists who were demons to become theists only. He did not mislead any soul from good to bad. God always tries to uplift the souls but does not mislead any soul. But He was constrained by limitations. The standards of atheists cannot be raised suddenly from ground to sky in which case they will go back. In the view of such psychology, Shankara dragged them up to some distance, which is the maximum extent in their case. Above that there is the danger of fatigue. He purposefully told that soul is God so that the atheist is attracted by His native ambition and atleast accept the existence of God. You say that such trick of Shankara as misleading the soul! In that case, the mother who gives food to her child by stating that the moon will come down if the child eats the food is also fraud and cheating the child! Shankara and Ramanuja know the spiritual knowledge from beginning to end because both are the incarnations of the same God. Shankara introduced that much part of the truth which alone can maintain the receivers. More than that will end in the total damage. This is not the fault of Sankara. It is the limitation of standards of the then atheists to whom only Sankara had to preach. When Ramanuja came the situation was better. He handled the believers in God. He separated God from the soul. He showed God in the energetic form called as Narayana. He could not introduce the human incarnation (Krishna) because the theists could not digest the human form of God at that time. Up to this everything is correct in view of the then existing standards of the receivers. Later on when Madhva came, the situation was much developed and the concept of human incarnation was digested. Hence, Madhva introduced the human incarnation (Krishna) and the devotee Hanuman who worshipped the human incarnation only. Madhva could not introduce the concept of human incarnation in every generation because the then devotees could not digest the then existing human incarnation, who was Madhva Himself. The Iskcon is just a replica of the way of Madhva. The spiritual path was will developed from Sankara to Ramanuja and to Madhva. The concept of human incarnation in every generation is now established by Datta Swami based on the words of your Krishna only (Yada Yadahi – Gita). Your base is certainly Ramanuja and Madhva, who give more importance to the devotee than God. You accept that Siva is the greatest devotee of Vishnu (Parama Bhagavata Uttama). You quote the scripture also in this context (Vaishnavanaam Yatha Sambhuh). In such case, a follower of Vishnu who insults Lord Siva must be ashamed, since he is contradicting the very philosophy of the original preacher of his own Vaishnava cult. The scriptures also say that Krishna worshipped Lord Siva and also Narayana worshipped Lord Siva on the mountain of Meru. The scripture also says that Lord Vishnu became Mohini and became the wife of Lord Siva and gave birth to Sashta. Therefore, it is foolish to fight with each other without understanding the preachers and the various forms of the same God. Narayana means the source of divine knowledge. This word indicates only Parabrahman. The knowledge is not the inherent sign of the unimaginable God (Parabrahman). God is only the source or basis for the knowledge. This is indicated by the word Narayana. Siva means auspicious without any second impurity. God being the absolute truth is one without second and therefore, becomes the purest entity. Purity is the auspicious quality (Siva). The Veda also says that Shiva is one without second (Advaitah Sivah). Rudra means the God, who punishes the sinners and make them weep (Rodayati iti Rudrah). If you recognize the concept of unimaginable God and the energetic forms as media, you will be clear. I appreciate you for having come to the height of the human incarnation (Manusheem Tanum Asritam – Gita). You will come to the final point of the divine knowledge, if you accept the existence of human incarnation in every generation by following the same Gita.
You say that simple theoretical devotion is sufficient to please God and you quoted a verse from the Gita (Satatam keertayantah…). What about other verses which praise the practical devotion like the sacrifice of work and fruit of work? Even in your verse, you have not understood the meaning of “Yatantascha Drudhavratah”. The word Yatantah means practical effort (Purusha Prayatna). The word Drudhavratah is associated with this word, which means that the practical effort comes only by firm determination.
The basis of Madhva was also the same of Ramanuja in the final God as Lord Narayana. But He stressed on Lord Krishna in the Ashtapetham (Udipi, India). He also stressed on Hanuman who worshiped only the human incarnation (Rama). The awareness of Shankara, the Lord Narayana of Ramanuja, the stress on the human incarnation (Rama and Krishna) of Madhva are the three gradual steps from formless to energetic form to human form of God. The fourth stage can be the Iskcon, which limits only to the human incarnation (Krishna). The final and fifth stage is Datta Swami, who concentrates on the present alive human incarnation. In this spiritual ladder, the Iskcon is a conservative Hinduism. They believe only one past human incarnation like conservative Christians who believe Jesus only. In this stage the development of their aspects shall be done by generalizing the same God in all the past human incarnations through Universal Spirituality (Krishna, Buddha, Jesus etc.,). They should also extend such generalized concept to the present human incarnation also. You can apply the philosophy of Advaita to all the human incarnations instead of all the human beings. Just like the same soul (Pure awareness) exists in all the human beings, similarly the same unimaginable God exists in all the human incarnations. The same concept can be applied to a specified group of energetic forms like Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva etc. Only such divine specific energetic forms are equal since the same unimaginable God exists in all those specified energetic forms. You should not generalize this concept to all the energetic forms like Indra, Vayu etc. Such concept will remove the misunderstanding in the followers of Ramanuja and Madhva who feel that only one energetic form ‘Narayana’ (Vishnu) is God. I am amazed to see this conservative concept even in the formless aspect of God! The Brahman of Hindus, the Jehovah of Christians and Allah of Muslims are formless. But still they fight with each other even in this formless aspect of God. That means they are differentiating the formless air as Hindu air, Christian air and Muslim air! At least we can excuse the difference in the forms of God, since the external forms differ. Krishna and Jesus differ in the external forms and the unity is only in the internal God. I assuredly tell you that you will not get the final salvation unless you are liberated from this conservative bond. What is the use of liberation from all the bonds except one bond? You are relieved from the ties of several ropes but if one tie of rope still exists, you cannot be declared as the completely liberated soul.