Guest guest Posted April 18, 2002 Report Share Posted April 18, 2002 The question is regarding the photo on the front of the club. It says its Lalitha. But then, I have a similar photo at home in Bangalore(I think) and it says that its Rajajeshwari. My Albums | Photo Albums > Om_Lalithaam... > angaali-150x203-lev4 looks more like the Lilitha maata I have always known. The photo of the Rajarajeshwari in the photo section looks so different. I have always seen the photo of Rajarajeshwari as in the photo on the club with a sugar cane in her hand. If someone could clarify, it will always help. I am looing at if we have some confusion here. - Seshadri. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 18, 2002 Report Share Posted April 18, 2002 To be completely honest, Seshadri, I am not sure. What I *think*, is that Rajarajeshwari is a form of Lalita (just as, last week, I'd noted that Maatangi Devi and Meenakshi Devi were essentially the same goddess with different names). In the Rajarajeshwari images I'm familiar with, She is usually holding the same symbols as in the Lalita image on our front page, but she is usually bare-breasted. I've also heard people say that Lalita and Tripurasundari are identical. Nonetheless, you are right, it is a matter of confusion and should be properly clear up. I think our esteemed member, Om_Nagarajan,a true and intense devotee of Lalita, would be able to definitively set us straight. May I request his assistance? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 18, 2002 Report Share Posted April 18, 2002 hi sesh! good question! The group picture is definitely that of sree raja rajeshweri - Here, she is seen with lakshmi devi and saraswati devi - as you know, raja rajeshwari is so named because she is the empress among all the goddesses... i have always seen sree raja rajeshwari depicted like this accompanied by lakjshmi and saraswati as her companions and a yantra of sri chakra in front- i think this is the way adi shankara established her peetham! on another note, The word -Lalitha- means one who revels in her transendence. But that's not her only manifestation.sree lalita sahasaranama poem depicts Her innumerable forms- as om srimat tripura sundaryai namha - om sree lalthambikayaii namaha - and as sree raja rajeshwaryaii namaha... ! sree lalita, balambika, sree raja rajeshweri, sree maha tripurasundari are all her different manifestations ! my 2 cents- for the past few days that is what i have been reciting the 1000 names of sree lalita!! sree kamakshi is also a manifestation of sree lalita . she is also known as bhavani. please read harshananda's posts and that will explain sree lalita's various manifestations! all are the different mannnifestions of the one divine cosmic mother ! we have to look beyond names and forms to understand fully the different aspects of 'motherhood' (as our beloved collin would say!) in her form as sree raja rajeshwei, she is the supreme ruler- the sovereign empress. in her form as sree lalita, she is the 'playful' one -her cosmic functions are all a 'sport' or lila to her. and as maha tripura sundari , she is the most beautiful in all three worlds. love ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 18, 2002 Report Share Posted April 18, 2002 , "devi_bhakta" <devi_bhakta> wrote: > To be completely honest, Seshadri, I am not sure. What I *think*, is > that Rajarajeshwari is a form of Lalita (just as, last week, I'd > noted that Maatangi Devi and Meenakshi Devi were essentially the same > goddess with different names). In the Rajarajeshwari images I'm > familiar with, She is usually holding the same symbols as in the > Lalita image on our front page, but she is usually bare-breasted. > I've also heard people say that Lalita and Tripurasundari are > identical. > > Nonetheless, you are right, it is a matter of confusion and should be > properly clear up. I think our esteemed member, Om_Nagarajan,a true > and intense devotee of Lalita, would be able to definitively set us > straight. May I request his assistance? >dear one , i recently joined this group,it is my first reply to your letter.all the tem mahavidhyas are diffecrent classes of one supreme goddess"parvat",once then lord shiva wanted to go away from her,then she appeared in ten different swarupas in all the ten directions,theses swarupas were named as "kali,tara,mahavidhya"ripurasundari,bhuvaneswari,tripurbhairavi,chh innamasta,bagalamukhi,maAtangi,dhUmAvati,and kamalA.out of them, the shodashi,tripurasundati,rajarajeswari,bAlA,lalitA,etc are names of same goddess,also:the tripurasundari,bhuvanesvari,tripurabhairavi,matangini,and kamala are coming in one group called the somya group,while kali,tara,chhinnmasta,dhumavati comes in second group called the ugra group,and mostly worshipped by vamachari sadhakas., if you go in deep,the philoshphy on "ekam sadvipra bahudha vadanti"is applicabled here.she is the one ,called by different names by the learned ones. spsharma Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 18, 2002 Report Share Posted April 18, 2002 Thank you, spsharma, and welcome to the Group! You wrote *** all the tem mahavidhyas are diffecrent classes of one supreme goddess "parvat" ... *** Ah, you are reviving one of our favorite themes around here -- the Dasha Mahavidya! The story of them appearing in the 10 directions to block Shiva's exit is one of my favorites as well. I know Nora has reposted some Mahavidya messages from the old Club; perhaps they're searchable in the message archives and we certainly have more. I am excited to have a new voice in our discussions. Are you engaged in Mahavidya Sadhana? Also, returning to the original question posed, do you know whether the Goddess posted in properly called Lalitha? Or is She Rajarajeshwari? I certainly agree with you that "She is the one, called by different names by the learned ones." But as a matter of iconography, have we correctly identified this form? As always, any and all input is welcome and encouraged! Aum Maatangyai Namahe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 18, 2002 Report Share Posted April 18, 2002 -dvi bhakta, dear one, This beautiful picture is that of goddess sree lalita (also sree raja rajeshwari) - in both icons, she is shown wearing a 'red' saree , accompanied by her divine companions lakshmi and saraswati , with a crescent moon on her head and a bejwelled crown - full of beauty and bliss.... she is lalita, the playful one ! she is raja rajeshwari the empress and she is maha tripurasundari, most beautiful in the three worlds... in her four hands, she carries a noose , a goad, a sugarcane bow and the five arrows!!! harsha will also testify to this ! love -- In , "devi_bhakta" <devi_bhakta> wrote: > Thank you, spsharma, and welcome to the Group! > > You wrote *** all the tem mahavidhyas are diffecrent classes of one > supreme goddess "parvat" ... *** > > Ah, you are reviving one of our favorite themes around here -- the > Dasha Mahavidya! The story of them appearing in the 10 directions to > block Shiva's exit is one of my favorites as well. I know Nora has > reposted some Mahavidya messages from the old Club; perhaps they're > searchable in the message archives and we certainly have more. > > I am excited to have a new voice in our discussions. Are you engaged > in Mahavidya Sadhana? Also, returning to the original question posed, > do you know whether the Goddess posted in properly called Lalitha? Or > is She Rajarajeshwari? I certainly agree with you that "She is the > one, called by different names by the learned ones." > > But as a matter of iconography, have we correctly identified this > form? As always, any and all input is welcome and encouraged! > > Aum Maatangyai Namahe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 19, 2002 Report Share Posted April 19, 2002 Hi Devi Bhaktha, It doesnt really matter in strict sense. When everything is the same lord, it shouldnt matter. Only that the photo shown to me as lalitha has always been a little different from the club photo. Yes, Lalitha is tripurasundhari. They are one and the same even from a dvaitha point of view. No problems. If this can be clarified, then its really good otherwise, I understand that its all the same lovable god. Thanks again. - Seshadri. - "devi_bhakta" <devi_bhakta > <> Thursday, April 18, 2002 7:40 PM Re: One Question To be completely honest, Seshadri, I am not sure. What I *think*, isthat Rajarajeshwari is a form of Lalita (just as, last week, I'dnoted that Maatangi Devi and Meenakshi Devi were essentially the samegoddess with different names). In the Rajarajeshwari images I'mfamiliar with, She is usually holding the same symbols as in theLalita image on our front page, but she is usually bare-breasted.I've also heard people say that Lalita and Tripurasundari areidentical.Nonetheless, you are right, it is a matter of confusion and should beproperly clear up. I think our esteemed member, Om_Nagarajan,a trueand intense devotee of Lalita, would be able to definitively set usstraight. May I request his assistance?------------------------ Sponsor ---------------------~-->Buy Stock for $4and no minimums.FREE Money 2002.http://us.click./k6cvND/n97DAA/ySSFAA/XUWolB/TM---~->To from this group, send an email to:shakti_sadhnaaYour use of Groups is subject to Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 19, 2002 Report Share Posted April 19, 2002 Yes maa. I understand. From a strict point of view, even we and everything around us is also a manifestation of the same mother. The real reason why I brought this question is because I have noticed the photos of the same goddess and gods are a little different in many houses and they vary by region and time. I was wondring if the photo is a consequence of such effects or is it mistaken. No other motives or confusions. Regards, Seshadri. - "adi_shakthi16" <adi_shakthi16 > <> Thursday, April 18, 2002 11:42 PM Re: One Question hi sesh! good question!The group picture is definitely that of sree raja rajeshweri - Here,she is seen with lakshmi devi and saraswati devi - as you know, rajarajeshwari is so named because she is the empress among all thegoddesses... i have always seen sree raja rajeshwari depicted likethis accompanied by lakjshmi and saraswati as her companions and ayantra of sri chakra in front- i think this is the way adi shankaraestablished her peetham!on another note, The word -Lalitha- means one who revels in hertransendence. But that's not her only manifestation.sree lalitasahasaranama poem depicts Her innumerable forms- as om srimattripura sundaryai namha - om sree lalthambikayaii namaha - and assree raja rajeshwaryaii namaha... !sree lalita, balambika, sree raja rajeshweri, sree mahatripurasundari are all her different manifestations !my 2 cents- for the past few days that is what i have been recitingthe 1000 names of sree lalita!!sree kamakshi is also a manifestation of sree lalita . she is alsoknown as bhavani.please read harshananda's posts and that will explain sree lalita'svarious manifestations!all are the different mannnifestions of the one divine cosmicmother !we have to look beyond names and forms to understand fully thedifferent aspects of 'motherhood' (as our beloved collin would say!)in her form as sree raja rajeshwei, she is the supreme ruler- thesovereign empress. in her form as sree lalita, she is the 'playful'one -her cosmic functions are all a 'sport' or lila to her. and asmaha tripura sundari , she is the most beautiful in all three worlds.love ...------------------------ Sponsor ---------------------~-->Buy Stock for $4and no minimums.FREE Money 2002.http://us.click./orkH0C/n97DAA/ySSFAA/XUWolB/TM---~->To from this group, send an email to:shakti_sadhnaaYour use of Groups is subject to Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 19, 2002 Report Share Posted April 19, 2002 Yes Sesh, you are exactly right. Otherwise we will get caught up in is sree LAlita superior to sree Raja Rajeshwari or is Sree Maha tripurasundari greatest ? or worse still, sree lalita is only worshipped by followers of Shri kanchi kamakoti swamigal, who was a brahmin etc... we already had a taste of that controversy in the ex shakti sadhana club. so, kali, durga, sree lalithambika are all manifestations of the same divine cosmic mother called adi parashakti! ! but i do understand fully where you are coming from! intellectual curiosity! but as our ramakrishna paramahansa says 'mother can be known only by child-like devotion, not by reason, intellect or scriptural study.' Smiles!!!! always , sree lalita (sree raja rajeshwari and sree mahatripurasundari as well ) are accompanied by saraswati and lakshmi ! they are the holy trinity!! meditate on sree lalita tripurasundari thus on this great friday dedicated to her !!!! The divine mother is to be meditated upon as shining in a vermillon - red body , with triple eyes. sporting a crown of rubies studded with the crescent moon, a face all smiles, a splendid bust, one hand holding a jewel-cup brimming with mead, and the other twirling a lotus. She is rosy like a dawn, her eyes are elongated like lotus petals, full of compassion for her devotees, perfect in every limb, dressed in red silk, wearing beautiful ornaments, holding in her hands the noose, the goad, the suga-cane bow, and the flower arrows. she bestows protection, prosperity and the eight siddhis . she is the vey embodiment of sree vidya!! om sree lalthambkayaii namaha!!! love and blessings sesh to you and padmini, your beauiful wife!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 19, 2002 Report Share Posted April 19, 2002 Thanks Adi and Seshadri for the input ... I'm attaching a Sri Rajarajeshwari image that explains my understanding of Her iconography. It's also in the Group photo album in the "Various ..." file. This is why I hesitated to label the Group picture as Rajarajeshwari. She seems a quite different aspect of Lalita. Also, is there some change or clarification I should make to Her title on the Group's front page? I know it's an intellectual exercise since "All are One," but since different Goddess forms have been promulgated, we may as well get the names right! Right? Aum Maatangyai Namahe Aum Maatangyai Namahe --- adi_shakthi16 <adi_shakthi16 wrote: > -dvi bhakta, dear one, > > This beautiful picture is that of goddess sree > lalita (also sree raja > rajeshwari) - in both icons, she is shown wearing a > 'red' saree , > accompanied by her divine companions lakshmi and > saraswati , with a > crescent moon on her head and a bejwelled crown - > full of beauty and > bliss.... > > she is lalita, the playful one ! she is raja > rajeshwari the empress > and she is maha tripurasundari, most beautiful in > the three worlds... > in her four hands, she carries a noose , a goad, a > sugarcane bow and > the five arrows!!! > > harsha will also testify to this ! > > love > > -- In , "devi_bhakta" > <devi_bhakta> wrote: > > Thank you, spsharma, and welcome to the Group! > > > > You wrote *** all the tem mahavidhyas are > diffecrent classes of one > > supreme goddess "parvat" ... *** > > > > Ah, you are reviving one of our favorite themes > around here -- the > > Dasha Mahavidya! The story of them appearing in > the 10 directions > to > > block Shiva's exit is one of my favorites as well. > I know Nora has > > reposted some Mahavidya messages from the old > Club; perhaps they're > > searchable in the message archives and we > certainly have more. > > > > I am excited to have a new voice in our > discussions. Are you > engaged > > in Mahavidya Sadhana? Also, returning to the > original question > posed, > > do you know whether the Goddess posted in properly > called Lalitha? > Or > > is She Rajarajeshwari? I certainly agree with you > that "She is the > > one, called by different names by the learned > ones." > > > > But as a matter of iconography, have we correctly > identified this > > form? As always, any and all input is welcome and > encouraged! > > > > Aum Maatangyai Namahe > > Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax http://taxes./ Attachment: (image/jpeg) Sri Rajarajeswari.jpg [not stored] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 19, 2002 Report Share Posted April 19, 2002 Hi All, The names Rajarajeshwari and TripuraSundari are like adjectives of Lalitha. Again we can even say that the names Lalitha and Tripurasundari are adjectives of the goddess Rajarajeshwari and so on. There is no difference between these three names, as said by Sesh even from a dvaita view point. Again ,the above three are different names, but not different forms of the same Goddess Lalitha. S. , "adi_shakthi16" <adi_shakthi16> wrote: > Yes Sesh, you are exactly right. Otherwise we will get caught up in > is sree LAlita superior to sree Raja Rajeshwari or is Sree Maha > tripurasundari greatest ? or worse still, sree lalita is only > worshipped by followers of Shri kanchi kamakoti swamigal, who was a > brahmin etc... we already had a taste of that controversy in the ex > shakti sadhana club. so, kali, durga, sree lalithambika are all > manifestations of the same divine cosmic mother called adi > parashakti! ! but i do understand fully where you are coming from! > intellectual curiosity! but as our ramakrishna paramahansa > says 'mother can be known only by child-like devotion, not by reason, > intellect or scriptural study.' Smiles!!!! > > always , sree lalita (sree raja rajeshwari and sree > mahatripurasundari as well ) are accompanied by saraswati and > lakshmi ! they are the holy trinity!! > > meditate on sree lalita tripurasundari thus on this great friday > dedicated to her !!!! > > The divine mother is to be meditated upon as shining in a vermillon - > red body , with triple eyes. sporting a crown of rubies studded with > the crescent moon, a face all smiles, a splendid bust, one hand > holding a jewel-cup brimming with mead, and the other twirling a > lotus. > > She is rosy like a dawn, her eyes are elongated like lotus petals, > full of compassion for her devotees, perfect in every limb, dressed > in red silk, wearing beautiful ornaments, holding in her hands the > noose, the goad, the suga-cane bow, and the flower arrows. she > bestows protection, prosperity and the eight siddhis . > > she is the vey embodiment of sree vidya!! > > om sree lalthambkayaii namaha!!! > > love and blessings sesh to you and padmini, your beauiful wife!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 19, 2002 Report Share Posted April 19, 2002 When I was a young teen and a punk rocker, I tripped on acid with my friends Reggy San Pedro and Bobby Bonehead, two other punk rockers. We drove from West Hollywood to Redondo beach arriving at 4:00 am. We happened to get to the beach on Beach Boy sunday where they were playing only Beach Boy tunes. We were some weird looking punks parked out on the boardwalk listening to the Beach Boys as the sun was rising and we were marvelously turned on by all the synomous occurences which felt like a form of unity consciousness. I didn't use such terminology at that time twenty years ago. But the beauty was huge. I've heard it said that Tripura's Body is like the sunrise on the ocean for beauty which was exactly what we were seeing. So what I'm saying is that I understood her then even when young and on drugs. Her name was beauty. I felt the great truth of beauty of life as an end in itself even then and that's why I took my combat boots with the chains entwined around them and threw them into the ocean as an offering to beauty itself. I don't think beauty needs any other name than....beauty, as beauty obliterates thought like Bhairavi, it extinguishes all differences between high and low like Kali, it is the very form of earth like Bhuvaneshwari, it is the glittering jewels of devas residing in Manipura, beauty is the face of your lover, child, animal, mother, mountain, and Bodhi Tree. I don't think anyone worships an ugly deity (Except Dhoomavati - well that itself is beautiful for its own reason). Only the most warped and hideous people worship satan or his legion, but because in their twisted minds there's some relief to their own ugliness which also therefore equals a type of beauty in their minds. When we think of war we can say it is evil because it destroys beauty in all forms but to warriors they find beauty in the commonality of death and valour. Beauty or Tripura Devi the Sundari, is the consciousness which reflecting into the world can appreciate beauty. That consciousness is everywhere, but as Tripura it is the formless being above the three gunas. As Jesus said why even be charitable if in your heart is no love. So also, why worship God if one has never experienced beauty, there would be nothing to worship. A beautiful worship itself is the very body of Lalita. If one loves worship of beauty itself then all worship is of Lalita and all worship of beauty is itself worship of God/dess. Krishna worshippers find immense joy in thinking they have the 100% right best mode of worship, so do Jesuits and Muslims and Jews, but we can all know that Lalita claims all worship as hers because her very name is beauty. Therefore she draws all experience together across the globe and is the King of Kings of God the Rajarajaishwari. When tripping on acid as a kid I saw beauty in everything even to the fiber of a hair. The experience was a good one even now and even after having also had many bad trips and using other worse and very unbeautiful kinds of drugs. I certainly am not condoning drug use at this late date. But find your means to the path of beauty because it is better to have loved and lost than never loved at all, and for those who have never seen Lalita as the sunrise in the ocean of the heart they are infinitely poor and despisable people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 22, 2002 Report Share Posted April 22, 2002 That is exactly the reason why I raised the question. But I think I have some answers which are valid from a non-perfectionist(this itself is an attitude aka a point of view). 1. Rajajareshwari or Lalitha is treated as the same. This treating as the same is a loosely held view. Because, by the same parameter, saraswathi and Durga are also the same as its Saraswathi(Vidya Lakshmi) and Lakshmi.BUt then, most people accept Rajajeshwari and Lalitha as the same more than Saraswathi and Lakshmi and Durga. :-) 2. Images of the lord varies with time. My own grandmother has photographs from her childhood. The lord photos from that time looks very Mysorean and different. It looks ancient. That in itself speaks about it. 3. Images of the lord varies with region. The way saraswathi and gayathri are dipcted in North and the South are very apparent and so there must be differences inthe esat and the west too. Even North and South Karnataka has differences, this also includes differences in East Karnataka which is the coastal region and the Mysorean region. Considering all these, question is what we could perhaps treat as Rajarajeshwari could be Lalitha to some. I think if we try and investigate we could simply get intpo these issues of region and time with each claiming that thay are perhaps used to seeing their lord in their favourite form. I think I would like to drop the question, provided the memebers are satisfied. Otherwise, we can continue. Thanks again for the help. The interaction had been quite fruitful. - Seshadri. , Devi bhakta <devi_bhakta> wrote: > Thanks Adi and Seshadri for the input ... > > I'm attaching a Sri Rajarajeshwari image that explains > my understanding of Her iconography. It's also in the > Group photo album in the "Various ..." file. This is > why I hesitated to label the Group picture as > Rajarajeshwari. She seems a quite different aspect of > Lalita. > > Also, is there some change or clarification I should > make to Her title on the Group's front page? I know > it's an intellectual exercise since "All are One," but > since different Goddess forms have been promulgated, > we may as well get the names right! Right? > > Aum Maatangyai Namahe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 22, 2002 Report Share Posted April 22, 2002 sesh, my answer to you is this? has anyone actually seen sree lalita or sree raja rajeshwari or sree saraswati or sree lakshmi.. to one has experienced these divine forms, they are one and the same... to one who worships a 'picture' or an 'idol' they are differnt!! just go deeper and deeper- maa will reveal herself to you in all her different manifestations... go beyond the names and forms. keep trying!! one day it will become clear...... after all, most of these pictures and idols are made by artists and sculptors - calendar wallas and other artists- it is based on their imagination...kalpana shakti!! so, ravi verma (a kerala artist) may paint sree lalita resembling a kerala lady and a bengal artist may make a durga image resembling a bengalee woman... IT IS SAID GOD MADE MAN IN HIS IMAGE - THESE CALENDAR WALLAS MAKE GODDESSESSES IN THE IMAGE OF MOVIE QUEENS... we imagine the goddess to be in a certain form based on how they are described in the scriptures... that's all !! MAA IS NIRVIKALPA!!! SHE IS BEYOND IMAGINATION!!! OM PRAJNANA-GHANA-RUPINYAI NAMAHA SALUTATIONS TO HER WHO IS ***PURE CONSCIOUSNESS**** CONDENSED!!! best wishes, love p.s. this is what my gurudeva told me and i am repeating the same to you. i used to bug him about whether kali is krishna etc... this is what he always used to say .. go beyond names and forms... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 22, 2002 Report Share Posted April 22, 2002 maa, I understand this. This wasnt an intellectual exercise. It was a precision one. But also a sloka for you. avikaaraaya shudhdhaaya nityaaya paramathmane sadhaiva roopa roopaaya vishnu ve probhu vishnu ve. The lord is avikaara and also with aakaara. This is what Totapuri, the master of Ramakrishna learnt from Ramakrishna and then from the mother herself. I am sure you know the story. He tries to commit suicide and the waters of the ganges recedes and in frustration when he shouts about, he finds himself talking to the mother who explains to him that Brahman is not only something that he should realise, it is also the consciousness and mother embodiment. My two pence. Its not that I am confused between Lalitha or Rajarajeshwari. Its just that tehir photos looked different and I started an activity from a precision point of view of the photos only. Regards, Seshadri. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 22, 2002 Report Share Posted April 22, 2002 If I may add my two pence worth *smile* I think I agree with Sheshaadri. The rupa I meditate upon is important (to me). My rupas are based on Dhyanaslokas. If that were not important there would have been no dhyanaslokas. For each mantra there is a rishi, a chandas and a devata; the devata has a dhyanasloka. The rishi first realised goodhood in that form. So a traditionalist (like me) prefers to stick to that. Kochu --- Seshadri <dksesh wrote: > maa, I understand this. This wasnt an intellectual > exercise. It was a precision one. > But also a sloka for you. > avikaaraaya shudhdhaaya nityaaya paramathmane > sadhaiva roopa roopaaya vishnu ve probhu vishnu ve. > > The lord is avikaara and also with aakaara. > This is what Totapuri, the master of Ramakrishna > learnt from Ramakrishna and then from the mother > herself. I am sure you know the story. He tries to > commit suicide and the waters of the ganges recedes > and in frustration when he shouts about, he finds > himself talking to the mother who explains to him > that Brahman is not only something that he should > realise, it is also the consciousness and mother > embodiment. > > My two pence. Its not that I am confused between > Lalitha or Rajarajeshwari. Its just that tehir > photos looked different and I started an activity > from a precision point of view of the photos only. > > > Regards, > Seshadri. > > Games - play chess, backgammon, pool and more http://games./ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 22, 2002 Report Share Posted April 22, 2002 hey sesh, i have been chanting sree lalita sahasaranama fairly regularly along with her dhyana sloka for a little over a year ever since our beloved harshananda advised me that reciting sree lalita sahasaranama is the first step in sri vidya upasana. believe me, when i saw the group picture posted by devi bhakta (and nora) this past week - i saw the beautiful form of sree Lltha devi (aka as sree raja rajeshwari - in fact, this very well could be her raja rajeshwari image) - i was ecstatic - not for a moment did i wonder why he calls sree lalita as sree raja rajeswari because i know them to be the SAME!!! WHO IS SREE LALITA -SHE IS RAJA RAJESHWARI - THE EMPRESS OF THE UNIVERSE!!! of course, sometimes sree lalita is shown as being seated alone without her companions sree lakshmi and sree saraswati but sree raja rajeshwari is always shown with her companions sree lakshmi and sree saraswati always!!! (at least in the pictures i have seen) .... sthis is not like saying all gods/godesses are the same... shiva is shiva - vishnu is vishnu i will discuss about 'brahman' later... durga and mahisura sura mardini are one and the same but durga and kali maa are they the same? not to kali bhaktas or durga maa bhaktas!! so this is not about semantics or being precise... shankara kochu has raised an interesting point about dhyana sloka... here are the dhyana slokas for sree lalita and sree raja rajeshwari... I meditate on the Divine Mother (sree lalita) whose body has the red hue of vermilion, who has three eyes, who wears a beautiful crown studded with rubies, who is adorned with the crescent Moon, whose face sports beautiful smile indicating compassion, who has beautiful limbs, whose hands holds a jewel studded golden vessel filled with nectar, and in the other a red lotus flower. ********************************************************************** I meditate on the great Empress, (sree raja rajeshwari) who is red in color, whose eyes are full of compassion, who holds a noose, goad, bow and flowery arrow in Her hands, who is surrounded on all sides by powers such as aNimA for rays, and who is the Self within me. ********************************************************************** I meditate on the Divine Mother, who is seated on the lotus, whose face is radiant, whose eyes are like lotus petals, who is golden hued, who has lotus flowers in Her hand, who dispels fear of the devotees who bow before Her, who is the embodiment of peace, who is knowledge (vidyA), who is praised by gods, and who grants every kind of wealth wished for. ********************************************************************** I meditate on the Mother, whose eyes are smiling, who holds the arrow, bow, noose and the goad in Her hand, who is glittering with red garlands and ornaments, who is painted with kumkuma on her forehead, and who is red and tender like the japa flower. ********************************************************************** this is the sree lalita i visualize and this is how i meditate on her every day... the picture devi bhakta posted brought up before my eyes this 'visualization' ! of course, sree lalita is sometimes seated alone and sometimes shown with her companions sree lakshmi and sree saraswati... and sree raja rajeshwari is always shown with the two companions sree laksmi and sree saraswati... but you are right, photos look different but the dhyana sloka enables you to visualize her in a beautiful form... butm iyt is ok... because you raised this question, at least we all are having an interesting conversation... thanks, love om sri matrayaii namaha!! continued... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 22, 2002 Report Share Posted April 22, 2002 - thanks for this beautiful sloka on god with form and the formless brahman... thanks also for reminding about the 'totapuri' incident ... Just as shri ramakrishna got enlightened by his guru totapuri , totapuri also learned something from his disciple shri ramakrishna. "totapuri was a born non-dualist and had no faith in personal GOD. HE DID NOT BELIEVE IN THE TERRIBLE ASPECT OF KALIP, much less in the benign aspect. music and the chanting of gods holy name were to him only so much nonsense. he ridiculed the spending of emotion in the worship of a personal GOD........ fROM shri ramakrishna, totapuri had to learn the significance of kali., the great fact of the relative world, and of maya, the indescribable power. one day , when guru and the disciple were engazed in an animated discussion about vedanta, a servant of the temple garden came there and took a coal from the sacred fire that had been lighted up by the great ascetic. he wanted it to light his tobacco. totapuri flew into a rage and was about to beat the man. sri ramakrishna rocked with laughter. "what a shame! he cried, you are explaining to me the reality of BRAHMAN and the illusoriness of the world, yet now you have so far forgotton yourself as to be about to beat a man in a fit of passion. the power of maya is indeed scrutable. ! Totapuri was embarrassed. Totapuri was suddenly laid up with a severe attack of dysentry. on account of this miserable illness he found it impoosible to meditate , one night the pain became excruciating . he could no longer concentrate on BRAHMAN... THE BODY STOOD IN THE WAY... a free soul, he did not at all care for the body. so he dtermined to drown it in the ganges.... thereupon he walked into the river. but lo!he walks to the other bank. is there not enough water in the ganges? standing dumbofounded on the other bank he looks back across the water. the trees, the tmples, the houses, are silhouetted against the sky..... suddenly, in one dazzling moment, totapuri sees on all sides the presence of the DIVINE MOTHER. she is in everything . she is everything. she is in the water. she is on land. she is the body. she is the mind. she is pain. she is comfort. she is knowledge . she is ignorance. she is life. she is death. she is everything one sees, hears, or imagines. she turns 'yes' into 'no' and 'no' into 'yes.' without her grace no embodied being can go beyond her realm. man has no free will. he is not even free to die. yet, beyond the body and mind . she resides in her transcedental absolute aspect. she is brahman that totapuri had been worshipping all her life." this is that famous incident that sesh is referring to... it is in the gospel ... every time i read it, i love it... it sends a shiver down my spine... so, this brings us to the basic question,.... can we describe the divine mother or for that brahman? adi shankara says in a verse in anandalahari "bhavan twam" ...... bhavaani stotuM tvaaM prabhavati chaturbhirna vadanaiH prajaanaamiishaanas-tripuramathanaH paJNchabhirapi | na shhaDbhiH senaaniir-dashashatamukhairapyahipati- stadanyeshhaaM keshhaaM kathaya kathamasminnavasaraH || 1 || O Bhavaani, Spouse of Shiva! Brahmaa the Creator cannot perfectly describe You with his four mouths! Nor can Lord Shiva do so even with five mouths! Lord Kaartikeya cannot possibly describe Your glories with his six mouths. Let this be as it may, but even Adi Sheshha (who bears Lord Vishnu) cannot describe You with his thousand mouths. Therefore, tell me O Bhavaani, how is there any scope for others (like me) to praise You perfectly? Comments: Shankara is worshipping Brahman in the form of the Goddess here. The point being made is that Brahman or the Goddess is beyond the reach of words or the mind. In order to describe something we have to have the imagination and the vocabulary to construct the description. But Brahman is beyond the grasp of the mind and words. As the taiitiriiya upanishad proclaims, "yato vaacho nivartante apraapya manasaa saha ...", words and the mind fail to reach Brahman, and also the Katha upanishhad, "naiva vaachaa na manasaa praaptuM shakyo...", (Brahman) cannot be attained by words or by the mind. This being the case, it is little wonder then that even gods cannot describe the Supreme Reality. So Shankara asks Goddess BhavaanI, "How can I praise You perfectly?" courtesy ambaa... so the point is how can we mortals even paint a picture of the divine mother precisely or perfectly ; we can only use our imagination based on the description in the scriptures... that she is slender waiste, she has a big bust, her body is like a creeper, she wears a crwn studded with rubies, she is dressed in red silks, wears lot of beautiful ornaments, she has four hands , in each hand - she holds a noose, a goad, sugarcane and five arrows etc.... so on and so forth... One can see the god/ess only throuth the eyes of the scriptures- jnasaya chaksuhu.... jai guru deva!!! jai mahakali!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 23, 2002 Report Share Posted April 23, 2002 Yes maa, the story brings tears of love ad joy to the eyes everytime. What totapuri learnt is that eerything is the lord and this everything is literally everything, personal and impersonal god. From that view point, dualism and non-dualism both are the lord again. But then, we an afford to be a child cant we? Ramakrishna knew very well that the Kaali mother is none other than himself, the brahman, but yet he used to behave like a child with her but like a guru to others. Its a luxury we can afford with responsibility. - Seshadri. - "adi_shakthi16" <adi_shakthi16 > <> Tuesday, April 23, 2002 12:17 AM Re: One Question -thanks for this beautiful sloka on god with form and the formlessbrahman...thanks also for reminding about the 'totapuri' incident ...Just as shri ramakrishna got enlightened by his guru totapuri ,totapuri also learned something from his disciple shri ramakrishna."totapuri was a born non-dualist and had no faith in personal GOD. HEDID NOT BELIEVE IN THE TERRIBLE ASPECT OF KALIP, much less in thebenign aspect. music and the chanting of gods holy name were to himonly so much nonsense. he ridiculed the spending of emotion in theworship of a personal GOD........fROM shri ramakrishna, totapuri had to learn the significance ofkali., the great fact of the relative world, and of maya, theindescribable power.one day , when guru and the disciple were engazed in an animateddiscussion about vedanta, a servant of the temple garden came thereand took a coal from the sacred fire that had been lighted up by thegreat ascetic. he wanted it to light his tobacco. totapuri flew intoa rage and was about to beat the man. sri ramakrishna rocked withlaughter. "what a shame! he cried, you are explaining to me thereality of BRAHMAN and the illusoriness of the world, yet now youhave so far forgotton yourself as to be about to beat a man in a fitof passion. the power of maya is indeed scrutable. ! Totapuri wasembarrassed.Totapuri was suddenly laid up with a severe attack of dysentry. onaccount of this miserable illness he found it impoosible tomeditate , one night the pain became excruciating . he could nolonger concentrate on BRAHMAN... THE BODY STOOD IN THE WAY... a freesoul, he did not at all care for the body. so he dtermined to drownit in the ganges.... thereupon he walked into the river.but lo!he walks to the other bank. is there not enough water in theganges? standing dumbofounded on the other bank he looks back acrossthe water.the trees, the tmples, the houses, are silhouetted against thesky.....suddenly, in one dazzling moment, totapuri sees on all sides thepresence of the DIVINE MOTHER. she is in everything . she iseverything. she is in the water. she is on land. she is the body. sheis the mind. she is pain. she is comfort. she is knowledge . she isignorance. she is life. she is death. she is everything one sees,hears, or imagines. she turns 'yes' into 'no' and 'no' into 'yes.'without her grace no embodied being can go beyond her realm. man hasno free will. he is not even free to die. yet, beyond the body andmind . she resides in her transcedental absolute aspect. she isbrahman that totapuri had been worshipping all her life."this is that famous incident that sesh is referring to... it is inthe gospel ....every time i read it, i love it... it sends a shiver down my spine...so, this brings us to the basic question,....can we describe the divine mother or for that brahman?adi shankara says in a verse in anandalahari "bhavan twam" ......bhavaani stotuM tvaaM prabhavati chaturbhirna vadanaiHprajaanaamiishaanas-tripuramathanaH paJNchabhirapi |na shhaDbhiH senaaniir-dashashatamukhairapyahipati-stadanyeshhaaM keshhaaM kathaya kathamasminnavasaraH || 1 ||O Bhavaani, Spouse of Shiva! Brahmaa the Creator cannot perfectlydescribe You with his four mouths! Nor can Lord Shiva do so even withfive mouths! Lord Kaartikeya cannot possibly describe Your glorieswith his six mouths. Let this be as it may, but even Adi Sheshha (whobears Lord Vishnu) cannot describe You with his thousand mouths.Therefore, tell me O Bhavaani, how is there any scope for others(like me) to praise You perfectly?Comments:Shankara is worshipping Brahman in the form of the Goddess here. Thepoint being made is that Brahman or the Goddess is beyond the reachof words or the mind. In order to describe something we have to havethe imagination and the vocabulary to construct the description. ButBrahman is beyond the grasp of the mind and words. As the taiitiriiyaupanishad proclaims, "yato vaacho nivartante apraapya manasaasaha ...", words and the mind fail to reach Brahman, and also theKatha upanishhad, "naiva vaachaa na manasaa praaptuM shakyo...",(Brahman) cannot be attained by words or by the mind.This being the case, it is little wonder then that even gods cannotdescribe the Supreme Reality. So Shankara asks Goddess BhavaanI, "Howcan I praise You perfectly?"courtesy ambaa...so the point is how can we mortals even paint a picture of the divinemother precisely or perfectly ; we can only use our imagination basedon the description in the scriptures... that she is slender waiste,she has a big bust, her body is like a creeper, she wears a crwnstudded with rubies, she is dressed in red silks, wears lot ofbeautiful ornaments, she has four hands , in each hand - she holds anoose, a goad, sugarcane and five arrows etc.... so on and soforth...One can see the god/ess only throuth the eyes of the scriptures-jnasaya chaksuhu....jai guru deva!!!jai mahakali!!!!------------------------ Sponsor ---------------------~-->Buy Stock for $4and no minimums.FREE Money 2002.http://us.click./orkH0C/n97DAA/ySSFAA/XUWolB/TM---~->To from this group, send an email to:shakti_sadhnaaYour use of Groups is subject to Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.