What the Shiva Purana actually says (Shiva Sati story)

[Guest guest]

adi_shakthi16 wrote (Wed, 13 Feb 2002):

>-colin, thank you for sharing your views on this subject.

 

I'm glad my views are of interest.

>the version i quoted was based on the 'shiva purana'

 

I've just visited a library where there is a copy of the Shiva Purana, in

an verse by verse English translation published by Motilal Banarsidass of

Delhi in 1970. It is Volume 1 of the series _Ancient Indian Tradition and

Mythology_ edited by J.L.Shastri.

 

I have to tell you that the version of the Shiva-Sati story which appears

in it is in many ways different from the version you quoted.

 

In your earlier posting you said that your version came from the web.

 

If we want to know what the Shiva Purana actually says, which is the more

reliable source...

 

1.A verse by verse translation of the Shiva Purana?

 

or

 

2.A narrative on a website which claims to be based on the Shiva Purana?

>in the version, i read, shiva was 'enraged' at his beloved

>wife's untimely death - so enraged was he that he cut daksha's head

>and threw it into the sacrificial fire.

 

In the version I've just been looking at, Shiva is certainly angered by the

death of Sati. However, Shiva doesn't personally cut off Daksha's head.

Shiva sends a being called Virabhadra to do this, while Shiva himself waits

in Kailasa.

>then upon request . he found

>the head of a 'goat' on daksha's head and revived him.

 

Yes. In the Shiva Purana he comes down and does this after the gods visit

Kailasa to propitiate him.

>in this version that i read, shiva does take the lifeless 'body' of

>sati and in a 'frenzied' mood did the 'tandava' dance - he was

>roaming round carrying the corpse of sati on his shoulders like a mad

>man -then vishnu threw his 'disc' (sudarshana chakra) and cut her

>body into several pieces and sati's body fell all over and these

>places were honred as shakti peethas! please refer to post on shakti

>peethas!

 

None of this happens in the text I've just read.

 

The Shiva Purana version of Sati story ends with Shiva accepting the

worship of the revived and repentant Daksha, then going back to Kailasa and

talking about Sati to his followers there.

 

The text actually specifies that Sati's body was "reduced to ashes" when

she died. (Siva Purana, Rudrasamhita, Section II, chapter 30 verses 6 to

8). There is simply no body for Shiva to carry around or for Vishnu to cut

up.

 

The story about the origin of the shakta pithas is well known and

important. It is found in the Kalika Purana, and probably in other writings

as well. But not in the Shiva Purana.

 

Does this matter? Is it important to distinguish between different versions

of a sacred story such as the myth of Shiva and Sati?

 

I think it is important, because the diversity is part of the richness of

India's sacred lore. That richness is obscured when a particular version of

the Shiva Sati myth (for instance) is presented as if it were the only one.

 

>who is to glorify whom? in shiva purana, shiva is glorified and in

>kalika purana mother kali glorified. in vishnu purana, vishnu is

>glorified.

 

True. This is another reason for distinguishing carefully between the

versions of a myth found in the different Puranas.

>whenver i read all these 'version' i always find that there are as

>many versions as there are translations!

 

So, the ideal thing is to read the original texts in Sanskrit.

>i use my sword of 'discrimination' and like a swan try to seperate

>the milk from the water!

 

I try to do that too. But the swan needs to find the water before it can

separate out the milk. In the same way, I feel that we need to look

carefully at the actual texts in order to get to their essence.

>as a woman (stree) it is very appealing to me to see

>shiva 'grieving ' for his wife, sati. (specially since valentine's

>day is just a day way- how romantic)

>by the same token, it is very 'sexy' to see sati sacrificing her life

>to make a statement that her beloved husband's honr means more to her

>than her own life? is this not the highest form of sacrifice?

>love!

 

As a man I can relate to all of that.

 

Om shantih,

 

Colin.