Guest guest Posted November 17, 2003 Report Share Posted November 17, 2003 I'd like to share this with the group and welcome any feedback that comes to your mind. I think I understand now why Ammachi's swami, when I asked for the mantra to go with the Ardhanarishwari, was upset with me. I don't think I shared this with the group, but after I received my mantra from Ammachi - which required going up twice because at first, I was given what to me was the wrong one), I was told by the swami who instructed me that the mantra didn't mean anything, that it meant "The God who is half woman," and wasn't a positive mantra for Devi. Yesterday, I re-read the Ardhanarishwari page on the Shakti Sadhana homepage (Devi section) which said that the deity was originally female, and that Shiva was superimposed onto her, and was made bigger and superior, with the female half becoming only his wife and consort, rather than an equal. First, Amma's people gave me a mantra that used the syllable "Hreem," which I know represents Shakti, but to me, I felt that both Shakti and Shiva should be named in the mantra with their names. I have not understood saying "Om Namah Shivaya" (which Amma's people do) as including Shakti, nor did I understand "Om Hreem Namah Shivaya" as holding Shakti and Shiva in perfect balance. I still feel it is valuable to name both Shakti and Shiva, God/dess, Fe/Male. Otherwise it is similar to Christianity in considering the "Holy Spirit" as the supposed female/feminine influence, relegating Female/Feminity to a whisper after imposing the Father and the Son, who are called not spirits, but Father and Son. -- Mary Ann Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 18, 2003 Report Share Posted November 18, 2003 Thank you Mary Ann for sharing this with us. Now the first thing that comes to my mind after reading it is that: "now this is what I will do if I am in Mary Ann's situation". Instead of going around asking people for the mantra, I would just ask DEVI herself. Talk to Ardhanareshwari Devi. Lament to her, if you have to about the difficulties of getting her true mantra (true in a sense according to your personal belief) you will be amazed what will come back to you. As far as I am concern I have no better suggestion but to redirect it back to DEVI. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 19, 2003 Report Share Posted November 19, 2003 Thank you very much, Nora, for your wise input on this. , "N. Madasamy" <ashwini_puralasamy> wrote: > Thank you Mary Ann for sharing this with us. Now the first thing that > comes to my mind after reading it is that: "now this is what I will > do if I am in Mary Ann's situation". Instead of going around asking > people for the mantra, I would just ask DEVI herself. Talk to > Ardhanareshwari Devi. Lament to her, if you have to about the > difficulties of getting her true mantra (true in a sense according > to your personal belief) you will be amazed what will come back to > you. As far as I am concern I have no better suggestion but to > redirect it back to DEVI. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 19, 2003 Report Share Posted November 19, 2003 Sri Mahasudarshanaya namaha Dear Madhva devotees, We are set of purohiths from south india, we are performing brihath Maha sudarshana homa .Anybody like to contribute can send funds in the name of Sri Mahasudarshana homa samithi,interested can reply me with Name , nakshatra, gothra, and detailed address. Other services we are providing is below.. Sri Mahasudarshana Homa Sri Harivayusthuthi punashcharane Navagraha homa mrithyunjaya homa Pavamana homa Brihathi sahasra maha yaaga Harivayusthuthi parayana Vishnusahasra nama parayana Sri Mahasudarshana Japa Lord srhi Hari bless all Mary Ann <maryann wrote:Thank you very much, Nora, for your wise input on this. , "N. Madasamy" <ashwini_puralasamy> wrote: > Thank you Mary Ann for sharing this with us. Now the first thing that > comes to my mind after reading it is that: "now this is what I will > do if I am in Mary Ann's situation". Instead of going around asking > people for the mantra, I would just ask DEVI herself. Talk to > Ardhanareshwari Devi. Lament to her, if you have to about the > difficulties of getting her true mantra (true in a sense according > to your personal belief) you will be amazed what will come back to > you. As far as I am concern I have no better suggestion but to > redirect it back to DEVI. Protect your identity with Mail AddressGuard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 19, 2003 Report Share Posted November 19, 2003 Namaste Mary Ann, Of course you already know that Shiva-Shakti are one, so when you name Shiva, you are also naming Shakti. On a more esoteric side, the mantra hrIM is made up of: ha = ether = Shiva ra = fire = Shakti I = preservation = Vishnu M = anusvara = dissolution and Oneness ha + ra (ether+fire or Shiva + Shakti) = creation ha + ra = hara, another name for Shiva ha + ra + I = hari, another name for Vishnu I = a vowel, which is a Shakti mantra, so "I" more poperly stands for the shakti of preservation a.k.a. Lakshmi IM = Kamakala = Kameshvari+Kamamesvara Basically, the mantra hrIM is the seed for ALL, Shiva-Shakti, creation, preservation, destruction. Further, this potent mantra is ascribed to Devi as Maya, but truly it holds all in balance. Further, see the Sri Vidya panchadashakshari mantra. Even though it is said to be a mantra for Lalita Mahatripurasundari, it is really for both Her and her spouse Kameshvara (Shiva). Some syllables stand for Shiva and some syllables stand for Shakti. When you repeat this mantra, there is no need to say any Shiva mantras, for it encodes both of them as ONE. Hope this helps... AUM , "Mary Ann" <maryann@m...> wrote: > I'd like to share this with the group and welcome any feedback > that comes to your mind. > > I think I understand now why Ammachi's swami, when I asked > for the mantra to go with the Ardhanarishwari, was upset with > me. I don't think I shared this with the group, but after I received > my mantra from Ammachi - which required going up twice > because at first, I was given what to me was the wrong one), I > was told by the swami who instructed me that the mantra didn't > mean anything, that it meant "The God who is half woman," and > wasn't a positive mantra for Devi. > > Yesterday, I re-read the Ardhanarishwari page on the Shakti > Sadhana homepage (Devi section) which said that the deity was > originally female, and that Shiva was superimposed onto her, > and was made bigger and superior, with the female half > becoming only his wife and consort, rather than an equal. First, > Amma's people gave me a mantra that used the syllable > "Hreem," which I know represents Shakti, but to me, I felt that > both Shakti and Shiva should be named in the mantra with their > names. I have not understood saying "Om Namah Shivaya" > (which Amma's people do) as including Shakti, nor did I > understand "Om Hreem Namah Shivaya" as holding Shakti and > Shiva in perfect balance. > > I still feel it is valuable to name both Shakti and Shiva, God/dess, > Fe/Male. Otherwise it is similar to Christianity in considering the > "Holy Spirit" as the supposed female/feminine influence, > relegating Female/Feminity to a whisper after imposing the > Father and the Son, who are called not spirits, but Father and > Son. > > -- Mary Ann Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 19, 2003 Report Share Posted November 19, 2003 Hello, and thank you for your input. I want to spend more time considering it, but it caused me to want to write this immediately. Can you tell me, if I say Shakti, is Shiva included? And can you, or anyone else out there, tell me, regarding this: "Shiva Shaktyaikya" -- if I want to say Shakti first, how would it go? I am assuming it would not work to say "Shakti Shivyaikya" .... Looking forward to responses, Mary Ann , "freyachilde" <freyachilde> wrote: > Namaste Mary Ann, > > Of course you already know that Shiva-Shakti are one, so when you > name Shiva, you are also naming Shakti. > > On a more esoteric side, the mantra hrIM is made up of: > > ha = ether = Shiva > ra = fire = Shakti > I = preservation = Vishnu > M = anusvara = dissolution and Oneness > > ha + ra (ether+fire or Shiva + Shakti) = creation > ha + ra = hara, another name for Shiva > ha + ra + I = hari, another name for Vishnu > I = a vowel, which is a Shakti mantra, so "I" more poperly stands > for the shakti of preservation a.k.a. Lakshmi > IM = Kamakala = Kameshvari+Kamamesvara > > Basically, the mantra hrIM is the seed for ALL, Shiva-Shakti, > creation, preservation, destruction. Further, this potent mantra is > ascribed to Devi as Maya, but truly it holds all in balance. > > Further, see the Sri Vidya panchadashakshari mantra. Even though it > is said to be a mantra for Lalita Mahatripurasundari, it is really > for both Her and her spouse Kameshvara (Shiva). Some syllables stand > for Shiva and some syllables stand for Shakti. When you repeat this > mantra, there is no need to say any Shiva mantras, for it encodes > both of them as ONE. > > Hope this helps... > > AUM > > > , "Mary Ann" <maryann@m...> > wrote: > > I'd like to share this with the group and welcome any feedback > > that comes to your mind. > > > > I think I understand now why Ammachi's swami, when I asked > > for the mantra to go with the Ardhanarishwari, was upset with > > me. I don't think I shared this with the group, but after I > received > > my mantra from Ammachi - which required going up twice > > because at first, I was given what to me was the wrong one), I > > was told by the swami who instructed me that the mantra didn't > > mean anything, that it meant "The God who is half woman," and > > wasn't a positive mantra for Devi. > > > > Yesterday, I re-read the Ardhanarishwari page on the Shakti > > Sadhana homepage (Devi section) which said that the deity was > > originally female, and that Shiva was superimposed onto her, > > and was made bigger and superior, with the female half > > becoming only his wife and consort, rather than an equal. First, > > Amma's people gave me a mantra that used the syllable > > "Hreem," which I know represents Shakti, but to me, I felt that > > both Shakti and Shiva should be named in the mantra with their > > names. I have not understood saying "Om Namah Shivaya" > > (which Amma's people do) as including Shakti, nor did I > > understand "Om Hreem Namah Shivaya" as holding Shakti and > > Shiva in perfect balance. > > > > I still feel it is valuable to name both Shakti and Shiva, > God/dess, > > Fe/Male. Otherwise it is similar to Christianity in considering > the > > "Holy Spirit" as the supposed female/feminine influence, > > relegating Female/Feminity to a whisper after imposing the > > Father and the Son, who are called not spirits, but Father and > > Son. > > > > -- Mary Ann Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 19, 2003 Report Share Posted November 19, 2003 Namaste, Because they are one, it goes both ways. So yes, when you say Shakti, Shiva is included. Sanskrit syntax is such that you can change the order of the words without changing the meanings, much like Latin. So you could say "Shaktyaikya Shiva." AUM , "Mary Ann" <maryann@m...> wrote: > Hello, and thank you for your input. I want to spend more time > considering it, but it caused me to want to write this immediately. > Can you tell me, if I say Shakti, is Shiva included? And can you, > or anyone else out there, tell me, regarding this: "Shiva > Shaktyaikya" -- if I want to say Shakti first, how would it go? I am > assuming it would not work to say "Shakti Shivyaikya" .... > > Looking forward to responses, > Mary Ann > > , "freyachilde" > <freyachilde> wrote: > > Namaste Mary Ann, > > > > Of course you already know that Shiva-Shakti are one, so when > you > > name Shiva, you are also naming Shakti. > > > > On a more esoteric side, the mantra hrIM is made up of: > > > > ha = ether = Shiva > > ra = fire = Shakti > > I = preservation = Vishnu > > M = anusvara = dissolution and Oneness > > > > ha + ra (ether+fire or Shiva + Shakti) = creation > > ha + ra = hara, another name for Shiva > > ha + ra + I = hari, another name for Vishnu > > I = a vowel, which is a Shakti mantra, so "I" more poperly > stands > > for the shakti of preservation a.k.a. Lakshmi > > IM = Kamakala = Kameshvari+Kamamesvara > > > > Basically, the mantra hrIM is the seed for ALL, Shiva-Shakti, > > creation, preservation, destruction. Further, this potent mantra > is > > ascribed to Devi as Maya, but truly it holds all in balance. > > > > Further, see the Sri Vidya panchadashakshari mantra. Even > though it > > is said to be a mantra for Lalita Mahatripurasundari, it is really > > for both Her and her spouse Kameshvara (Shiva). Some > syllables stand > > for Shiva and some syllables stand for Shakti. When you > repeat this > > mantra, there is no need to say any Shiva mantras, for it > encodes > > both of them as ONE. > > > > Hope this helps... > > > > AUM > > > > > > , "Mary Ann" > <maryann@m...> > > wrote: > > > I'd like to share this with the group and welcome any > feedback > > > that comes to your mind. > > > > > > I think I understand now why Ammachi's swami, when I > asked > > > for the mantra to go with the Ardhanarishwari, was upset with > > > me. I don't think I shared this with the group, but after I > > received > > > my mantra from Ammachi - which required going up twice > > > because at first, I was given what to me was the wrong one), > I > > > was told by the swami who instructed me that the mantra > didn't > > > mean anything, that it meant "The God who is half woman," > and > > > wasn't a positive mantra for Devi. > > > > > > Yesterday, I re-read the Ardhanarishwari page on the Shakti > > > Sadhana homepage (Devi section) which said that the deity > was > > > originally female, and that Shiva was superimposed onto > her, > > > and was made bigger and superior, with the female half > > > becoming only his wife and consort, rather than an equal. > First, > > > Amma's people gave me a mantra that used the syllable > > > "Hreem," which I know represents Shakti, but to me, I felt that > > > both Shakti and Shiva should be named in the mantra with > their > > > names. I have not understood saying "Om Namah Shivaya" > > > (which Amma's people do) as including Shakti, nor did I > > > understand "Om Hreem Namah Shivaya" as holding Shakti > and > > > Shiva in perfect balance. > > > > > > I still feel it is valuable to name both Shakti and Shiva, > > God/dess, > > > Fe/Male. Otherwise it is similar to Christianity in considering > > the > > > "Holy Spirit" as the supposed female/feminine influence, > > > relegating Female/Feminity to a whisper after imposing the > > > Father and the Son, who are called not spirits, but Father and > > > Son. > > > > > > -- Mary Ann Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 20, 2003 Report Share Posted November 20, 2003 But why doesn't Shiva conjugate? That is, why is the word Shakti still changing its ending, but Shiva stays Shiva? What does "yaikya" do or mean on the name Shakti? , "freyachilde" <freyachilde> wrote: > Namaste, > > Because they are one, it goes both ways. So yes, when you say > Shakti, Shiva is included. > > Sanskrit syntax is such that you can change the order of the > words without changing the meanings, much like Latin. So you > could say "Shaktyaikya Shiva." > > AUM > > , "Mary Ann" > <maryann@m...> wrote: > > Hello, and thank you for your input. I want to spend more time > > considering it, but it caused me to want to write this > immediately. > > Can you tell me, if I say Shakti, is Shiva included? And can you, > > or anyone else out there, tell me, regarding this: "Shiva > > Shaktyaikya" -- if I want to say Shakti first, how would it go? I am > > assuming it would not work to say "Shakti Shivyaikya" .... > > > > Looking forward to responses, > > Mary Ann > > > > , "freyachilde" > > <freyachilde> wrote: > > > Namaste Mary Ann, > > > > > > Of course you already know that Shiva-Shakti are one, so > when > > you > > > name Shiva, you are also naming Shakti. > > > > > > On a more esoteric side, the mantra hrIM is made up of: > > > > > > ha = ether = Shiva > > > ra = fire = Shakti > > > I = preservation = Vishnu > > > M = anusvara = dissolution and Oneness > > > > > > ha + ra (ether+fire or Shiva + Shakti) = creation > > > ha + ra = hara, another name for Shiva > > > ha + ra + I = hari, another name for Vishnu > > > I = a vowel, which is a Shakti mantra, so "I" more poperly > > stands > > > for the shakti of preservation a.k.a. Lakshmi > > > IM = Kamakala = Kameshvari+Kamamesvara > > > > > > Basically, the mantra hrIM is the seed for ALL, Shiva-Shakti, > > > creation, preservation, destruction. Further, this potent > mantra > > is > > > ascribed to Devi as Maya, but truly it holds all in balance. > > > > > > Further, see the Sri Vidya panchadashakshari mantra. Even > > though it > > > is said to be a mantra for Lalita Mahatripurasundari, it is > really > > > for both Her and her spouse Kameshvara (Shiva). Some > > syllables stand > > > for Shiva and some syllables stand for Shakti. When you > > repeat this > > > mantra, there is no need to say any Shiva mantras, for it > > encodes > > > both of them as ONE. > > > > > > Hope this helps... > > > > > > AUM > > > > > > > > > , "Mary Ann" > > <maryann@m...> > > > wrote: > > > > I'd like to share this with the group and welcome any > > feedback > > > > that comes to your mind. > > > > > > > > I think I understand now why Ammachi's swami, when I > > asked > > > > for the mantra to go with the Ardhanarishwari, was upset > with > > > > me. I don't think I shared this with the group, but after I > > > received > > > > my mantra from Ammachi - which required going up twice > > > > because at first, I was given what to me was the wrong > one), > > I > > > > was told by the swami who instructed me that the mantra > > didn't > > > > mean anything, that it meant "The God who is half woman," > > and > > > > wasn't a positive mantra for Devi. > > > > > > > > Yesterday, I re-read the Ardhanarishwari page on the > Shakti > > > > Sadhana homepage (Devi section) which said that the > deity > > was > > > > originally female, and that Shiva was superimposed onto > > her, > > > > and was made bigger and superior, with the female half > > > > becoming only his wife and consort, rather than an equal. > > First, > > > > Amma's people gave me a mantra that used the syllable > > > > "Hreem," which I know represents Shakti, but to me, I felt > that > > > > both Shakti and Shiva should be named in the mantra with > > their > > > > names. I have not understood saying "Om Namah > Shivaya" > > > > (which Amma's people do) as including Shakti, nor did I > > > > understand "Om Hreem Namah Shivaya" as holding Shakti > > and > > > > Shiva in perfect balance. > > > > > > > > I still feel it is valuable to name both Shakti and Shiva, > > > God/dess, > > > > Fe/Male. Otherwise it is similar to Christianity in > considering > > > the > > > > "Holy Spirit" as the supposed female/feminine influence, > > > > relegating Female/Feminity to a whisper after imposing the > > > > Father and the Son, who are called not spirits, but Father > and > > > > Son. > > > > > > > > -- Mary Ann Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 20, 2003 Report Share Posted November 20, 2003 Dear Respected Members: Do you really think that such electronic "puuja" can help oneself purify? One has to purify themselves to get any benefits from any activity. Recently I attended a puuja conducted by "So Called priest", who also works as a pujari at a Temple in USA. This wonderful puujaari recited the "sankalpa" after the "Uttar puuja" was done. When confronted he said that is the way we have been taught. Sankalpa is the purpose why yajamaana is performing the puuja. Most folks do not understand Sanskrit mantras, let alone their significance. These puujaari's should never get a vote from me, ever. This is degrading our own culture under name of religious, activities. Only thing this can possibly give is the pride to you, yourself that you have done "XYZ puuja" What a disgrace?? This is my pure frustration because number of these folks are exploiting the ignorance of Sanskrit language from common folks. But everybody has a right to fooled, who am I to tell anone!! Regards, Dr. Yadu , pleasant tune <pleasant_tune2002> wrote: > Sri Mahasudarshanaya namaha > > Dear Madhva devotees, > > We are set of purohiths from south india, we are performing brihath > Maha sudarshana homa .Anybody like to contribute can send funds in > the name of Sri Mahasudarshana homa samithi,interested can reply me > with Name , nakshatra, gothra, and detailed address. > > Other services we are providing is below.. > Sri Mahasudarshana Homa > Sri Harivayusthuthi punashcharane > Navagraha homa > mrithyunjaya homa > Pavamana homa > Brihathi sahasra maha yaaga > Harivayusthuthi parayana > Vishnusahasra nama parayana > Sri Mahasudarshana Japa > > Lord srhi Hari bless all > > > > Mary Ann <maryann@m...> wrote:Thank you very much, Nora, for your wise input on this. > > , "N. Madasamy" > <ashwini_puralasamy> wrote: > > Thank you Mary Ann for sharing this with us. Now the first thing > that > > comes to my mind after reading it is that: "now this is what I will > > do if I am in Mary Ann's situation". Instead of going around > asking > > people for the mantra, I would just ask DEVI herself. Talk to > > Ardhanareshwari Devi. Lament to her, if you have to about the > > difficulties of getting her true mantra (true in a sense according > > to your personal belief) you will be amazed what will come > back to > > you. As far as I am concern I have no better suggestion but to > > redirect it back to DEVI. > > > Sponsor > > > > > > > Terms of Service. > > > > > > Protect your identity with Mail AddressGuard > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 20, 2003 Report Share Posted November 20, 2003 Namaste Marry Ann, >From the Monier-Williams Sanskrit dictionary, "aikya" means: n. (from "eka") oneness , unity , harmony , sameness , identity; identity of the human soul or of the universe with the Deity. You could just as well say shakti shivaikya as shaktyaikya shiva, or shiva shaktyaikya: "Shakti and Shiva are one." Since they are one, it doesn't matter where the ending goes, it's saying the same thing. It's like saying "Rahu's head." There is nothing but Rahu's head anyway after it was chopped off by Devi Mohini in the ocean-churning story, so there is no point in saying "Rahu's head." One can just say "Rahu" and one understands "head" -- no need for the whole phrase "Rahu's head." Similary, one can just say "Shakti" or "Shiva" and it points to the same Oneness. However, it is necessary to say "shaktyaikya shiva" for those who have not yet understood this truth. AUM , "Mary Ann" <maryann@m...> wrote: > But why doesn't Shiva conjugate? That is, why is the word Shakti > still changing its ending, but Shiva stays Shiva? What does > "yaikya" do or mean on the name Shakti? > > , "freyachilde" > <freyachilde> wrote: > > Namaste, > > > > Because they are one, it goes both ways. So yes, when you say > > Shakti, Shiva is included. > > > > Sanskrit syntax is such that you can change the order of the > > words without changing the meanings, much like Latin. So you > > could say "Shaktyaikya Shiva." > > > > AUM > > > > , "Mary Ann" > > <maryann@m...> wrote: > > > Hello, and thank you for your input. I want to spend more time > > > considering it, but it caused me to want to write this > > immediately. > > > Can you tell me, if I say Shakti, is Shiva included? And can > you, > > > or anyone else out there, tell me, regarding this: "Shiva > > > Shaktyaikya" -- if I want to say Shakti first, how would it go? I > am > > > assuming it would not work to say "Shakti Shivyaikya" .... > > > > > > Looking forward to responses, > > > Mary Ann > > > > > > , "freyachilde" > > > <freyachilde> wrote: > > > > Namaste Mary Ann, > > > > > > > > Of course you already know that Shiva-Shakti are one, so > > when > > > you > > > > name Shiva, you are also naming Shakti. > > > > > > > > On a more esoteric side, the mantra hrIM is made up of: > > > > > > > > ha = ether = Shiva > > > > ra = fire = Shakti > > > > I = preservation = Vishnu > > > > M = anusvara = dissolution and Oneness > > > > > > > > ha + ra (ether+fire or Shiva + Shakti) = creation > > > > ha + ra = hara, another name for Shiva > > > > ha + ra + I = hari, another name for Vishnu > > > > I = a vowel, which is a Shakti mantra, so "I" more poperly > > > stands > > > > for the shakti of preservation a.k.a. Lakshmi > > > > IM = Kamakala = Kameshvari+Kamamesvara > > > > > > > > Basically, the mantra hrIM is the seed for ALL, Shiva-Shakti, > > > > creation, preservation, destruction. Further, this potent > > mantra > > > is > > > > ascribed to Devi as Maya, but truly it holds all in balance. > > > > > > > > Further, see the Sri Vidya panchadashakshari mantra. > Even > > > though it > > > > is said to be a mantra for Lalita Mahatripurasundari, it is > > really > > > > for both Her and her spouse Kameshvara (Shiva). Some > > > syllables stand > > > > for Shiva and some syllables stand for Shakti. When you > > > repeat this > > > > mantra, there is no need to say any Shiva mantras, for it > > > encodes > > > > both of them as ONE. > > > > > > > > Hope this helps... > > > > > > > > AUM > > > > > > > > > > > > , "Mary Ann" > > > <maryann@m...> > > > > wrote: > > > > > I'd like to share this with the group and welcome any > > > feedback > > > > > that comes to your mind. > > > > > > > > > > I think I understand now why Ammachi's swami, when I > > > asked > > > > > for the mantra to go with the Ardhanarishwari, was upset > > with > > > > > me. I don't think I shared this with the group, but after I > > > > received > > > > > my mantra from Ammachi - which required going up > twice > > > > > because at first, I was given what to me was the wrong > > one), > > > I > > > > > was told by the swami who instructed me that the mantra > > > didn't > > > > > mean anything, that it meant "The God who is half > woman," > > > and > > > > > wasn't a positive mantra for Devi. > > > > > > > > > > Yesterday, I re-read the Ardhanarishwari page on the > > Shakti > > > > > Sadhana homepage (Devi section) which said that the > > deity > > > was > > > > > originally female, and that Shiva was superimposed onto > > > her, > > > > > and was made bigger and superior, with the female half > > > > > becoming only his wife and consort, rather than an equal. > > > First, > > > > > Amma's people gave me a mantra that used the syllable > > > > > "Hreem," which I know represents Shakti, but to me, I felt > > that > > > > > both Shakti and Shiva should be named in the mantra > with > > > their > > > > > names. I have not understood saying "Om Namah > > Shivaya" > > > > > (which Amma's people do) as including Shakti, nor did I > > > > > understand "Om Hreem Namah Shivaya" as holding > Shakti > > > and > > > > > Shiva in perfect balance. > > > > > > > > > > I still feel it is valuable to name both Shakti and Shiva, > > > > God/dess, > > > > > Fe/Male. Otherwise it is similar to Christianity in > > considering > > > > the > > > > > "Holy Spirit" as the supposed female/feminine influence, > > > > > relegating Female/Feminity to a whisper after imposing > the > > > > > Father and the Son, who are called not spirits, but Father > > and > > > > > Son. > > > > > > > > > > -- Mary Ann Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 20, 2003 Report Share Posted November 20, 2003 Thank you so much for the information. I wonder if they have that dictionary at my local library. I will check out their online catalog. I also want to find the definition for "rupinyai," and if you feel inclined to check your copy, I'd be much obliged. I am happy to hear that the word ending can be placed on either name. I thought there might be limits about that due to feminine or masculine words per rules of language. I disagree that it makes no difference whether one utters "Shiva" or "Shakti," however. My perspective is that it's a mainstream view that envisioning God as male includes the female, or that it doesn't matter whether we consider God male or female because our essence is not gendered when we are no longer embodied. I look at the state of the world, and I think that the prevailing view is not working. I think articulating both names interchangeably can help realign ourselves and our world for better balance. After all, such interchangeability and articulation has not been happening for thousands of years, and for thousands of years, we have had much pain, violence and oppression. Im , "freyachilde" <freyachilde> wrote: > Namaste Marry Ann, > > From the Monier-Williams Sanskrit dictionary, "aikya" means: n. > (from "eka") oneness , unity , harmony , sameness , identity; > identity of the human soul or of the universe with the Deity. > > You could just as well say shakti shivaikya as shaktyaikya shiva, or > shiva shaktyaikya: "Shakti and Shiva are one." > > Since they are one, it doesn't matter where the ending goes, it's > saying the same thing. It's like saying "Rahu's head." There is > nothing but Rahu's head anyway after it was chopped off by Devi > Mohini in the ocean-churning story, so there is no point in > saying "Rahu's head." > > One can just say "Rahu" and one understands "head" -- no need for the > whole phrase "Rahu's head." Similary, one can just say "Shakti" > or "Shiva" and it points to the same Oneness. However, it is > necessary to say "shaktyaikya shiva" for those who have not yet > understood this truth. > > AUM > > > , "Mary Ann" <maryann@m...> > wrote: > > But why doesn't Shiva conjugate? That is, why is the word Shakti > > still changing its ending, but Shiva stays Shiva? What does > > "yaikya" do or mean on the name Shakti? > > > > , "freyachilde" > > <freyachilde> wrote: > > > Namaste, > > > > > > Because they are one, it goes both ways. So yes, when you say > > > Shakti, Shiva is included. > > > > > > Sanskrit syntax is such that you can change the order of the > > > words without changing the meanings, much like Latin. So you > > > could say "Shaktyaikya Shiva." > > > > > > AUM > > > > > > , "Mary Ann" > > > <maryann@m...> wrote: > > > > Hello, and thank you for your input. I want to spend more time > > > > considering it, but it caused me to want to write this > > > immediately. > > > > Can you tell me, if I say Shakti, is Shiva included? And can > > you, > > > > or anyone else out there, tell me, regarding this: "Shiva > > > > Shaktyaikya" -- if I want to say Shakti first, how would it go? > I > > am > > > > assuming it would not work to say "Shakti Shivyaikya" .... > > > > > > > > Looking forward to responses, > > > > Mary Ann > > > > > > > > , "freyachilde" > > > > <freyachilde> wrote: > > > > > Namaste Mary Ann, > > > > > > > > > > Of course you already know that Shiva-Shakti are one, so > > > when > > > > you > > > > > name Shiva, you are also naming Shakti. > > > > > > > > > > On a more esoteric side, the mantra hrIM is made up of: > > > > > > > > > > ha = ether = Shiva > > > > > ra = fire = Shakti > > > > > I = preservation = Vishnu > > > > > M = anusvara = dissolution and Oneness > > > > > > > > > > ha + ra (ether+fire or Shiva + Shakti) = creation > > > > > ha + ra = hara, another name for Shiva > > > > > ha + ra + I = hari, another name for Vishnu > > > > > I = a vowel, which is a Shakti mantra, so "I" more poperly > > > > stands > > > > > for the shakti of preservation a.k.a. Lakshmi > > > > > IM = Kamakala = Kameshvari+Kamamesvara > > > > > > > > > > Basically, the mantra hrIM is the seed for ALL, Shiva-Shakti, > > > > > creation, preservation, destruction. Further, this potent > > > mantra > > > > is > > > > > ascribed to Devi as Maya, but truly it holds all in balance. > > > > > > > > > > Further, see the Sri Vidya panchadashakshari mantra. > > Even > > > > though it > > > > > is said to be a mantra for Lalita Mahatripurasundari, it is > > > really > > > > > for both Her and her spouse Kameshvara (Shiva). Some > > > > syllables stand > > > > > for Shiva and some syllables stand for Shakti. When you > > > > repeat this > > > > > mantra, there is no need to say any Shiva mantras, for it > > > > encodes > > > > > both of them as ONE. > > > > > > > > > > Hope this helps... > > > > > > > > > > AUM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , "Mary Ann" > > > > <maryann@m...> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > I'd like to share this with the group and welcome any > > > > feedback > > > > > > that comes to your mind. > > > > > > > > > > > > I think I understand now why Ammachi's swami, when I > > > > asked > > > > > > for the mantra to go with the Ardhanarishwari, was upset > > > with > > > > > > me. I don't think I shared this with the group, but after > I > > > > > received > > > > > > my mantra from Ammachi - which required going up > > twice > > > > > > because at first, I was given what to me was the wrong > > > one), > > > > I > > > > > > was told by the swami who instructed me that the mantra > > > > didn't > > > > > > mean anything, that it meant "The God who is half > > woman," > > > > and > > > > > > wasn't a positive mantra for Devi. > > > > > > > > > > > > Yesterday, I re-read the Ardhanarishwari page on the > > > Shakti > > > > > > Sadhana homepage (Devi section) which said that the > > > deity > > > > was > > > > > > originally female, and that Shiva was superimposed onto > > > > her, > > > > > > and was made bigger and superior, with the female half > > > > > > becoming only his wife and consort, rather than an equal. > > > > First, > > > > > > Amma's people gave me a mantra that used the syllable > > > > > > "Hreem," which I know represents Shakti, but to me, I felt > > > that > > > > > > both Shakti and Shiva should be named in the mantra > > with > > > > their > > > > > > names. I have not understood saying "Om Namah > > > Shivaya" > > > > > > (which Amma's people do) as including Shakti, nor did I > > > > > > understand "Om Hreem Namah Shivaya" as holding > > Shakti > > > > and > > > > > > Shiva in perfect balance. > > > > > > > > > > > > I still feel it is valuable to name both Shakti and Shiva, > > > > > God/dess, > > > > > > Fe/Male. Otherwise it is similar to Christianity in > > > considering > > > > > the > > > > > > "Holy Spirit" as the supposed female/feminine influence, > > > > > > relegating Female/Feminity to a whisper after imposing > > the > > > > > > Father and the Son, who are called not spirits, but Father > > > and > > > > > > Son. > > > > > > > > > > > > -- Mary Ann Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 20, 2003 Report Share Posted November 20, 2003 "Thank you very much, Nora, for your wise input on this" Wise? There is nothing wise about it. Its nonsense actually. You do not talk to an image. You bring that image into the head, and thereafter let it be alive in you, and you thereafter become the image. So when you have become the image, why do you need the mantras? Then we do not have this trouble of mix and match mantras according to our whims and fancy. Can one actually mix and match mantras? What is the point of reciting a mantra that will not work at all or just sleep. It is better to just talk to DEVI in the words that you understand or do not recite anything. Just sit there: stare and smile at DEVI. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 21, 2003 Report Share Posted November 21, 2003 Hello Nora: I understand that for you, it just seems like meaningless manipulation of words, but to me, it has meaning and value, and comes from the source you recommend (wisely or not). As for becoming the image of the Ardhanareshwari, I grapple with the fact that the Shiva side on my favorite picture of the deity (the one from Nepal) is made larger than Shakti, has more arms, is holding more things, etc. I have been strongly influenced by what I have heard and seen in the world, that is, I know I carry prejudices that exist in language and imagery in myself. For me, the process of becoming the deity involves rooting out old habits that don't work, and developing actions and words that do. As for the mantra, I really do love Amma, who gave me what I asked for, unlike the swami who judged me and the mantra. I trust what I have been drawn to, just as you trust what you have been drawn to. Here are some of Amma's lyrics from her one song in English. I have made a slight change in the lyrics. Can you tell what the change is? "Grace us with your compassion, Lord / I am no one but you, my Lord. / You create this world by your whim / You dissolve this world by your will. / Grace us with your compassion, Lord / I am no one but you, my Lord." I hope Amma will not mind that I have become a co-writer. It's like that poem (or book?) called "God is my co-pilot" -- Amma is my co-writer! Smiling at Devi , "N. Madasamy" <ashwini_puralasamy> wrote: > "Thank you very much, Nora, for your wise input on this" > > Wise? There is nothing wise about it. Its nonsense actually. You do > not talk to an image. You bring that image into the head, and > thereafter let it be alive in you, and you thereafter become the > image. So when you have become the image, why do you need the > mantras? Then we do not have this trouble of mix and match mantras > according to our whims and fancy. Can one actually mix and match > mantras? What is the point of reciting a mantra that will not work at > all or just sleep. It is better to just talk to DEVI in the words > that you understand or do not recite anything. Just sit there: stare > and smile at DEVI. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 21, 2003 Report Share Posted November 21, 2003 Hello again, Go to http://sanskrit.gde.to/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 22, 2003 Report Share Posted November 22, 2003 Hello, and thank you for the link, and sharing your knowledge of Sanskrit. What a wonderful online resource. I'm also going to take the book entitled: Sanskrit: An Introduction to the Classical Language out from my local library, and hopefully it can help me further. Mary Ann , "freyachilde" <freyachilde> wrote: > Hello again, > > Go to > > http://sanskrit.gde.to/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 26, 2003 Report Share Posted November 26, 2003 Nora, Your love of the Goddess is a constant source of inspiration and support. Thank you for sharing with us. Namaste, prainbow , "N. Madasamy" <ashwini_puralasamy> wrote: > "Thank you very much, Nora, for your wise input on this" > > Wise? There is nothing wise about it. Its nonsense actually. You do > not talk to an image. You bring that image into the head, and > thereafter let it be alive in you, and you thereafter become the > image. So when you have become the image, why do you need the > mantras? Then we do not have this trouble of mix and match mantras > according to our whims and fancy. Can one actually mix and match > mantras? What is the point of reciting a mantra that will not work at > all or just sleep. It is better to just talk to DEVI in the words > that you understand or do not recite anything. Just sit there: stare > and smile at DEVI. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 26, 2003 Report Share Posted November 26, 2003 You are wise indeed Nora.Your explaination was very well put. love and best wishes. chumki. , "prainbow61" <paulie-rainbow@u...> wrote: > Nora, > > Your love of the Goddess is a constant source of inspiration and > support. Thank you for sharing with us. > > Namaste, > > prainbow > > , "N. Madasamy" > <ashwini_puralasamy> wrote: > > "Thank you very much, Nora, for your wise input on this" > > > > Wise? There is nothing wise about it. Its nonsense actually. You do > > not talk to an image. You bring that image into the head, and > > thereafter let it be alive in you, and you thereafter become the > > image. So when you have become the image, why do you need the > > mantras? Then we do not have this trouble of mix and match mantras > > according to our whims and fancy. Can one actually mix and match > > mantras? What is the point of reciting a mantra that will not work > at > > all or just sleep. It is better to just talk to DEVI in the words > > that you understand or do not recite anything. Just sit there: > stare > > and smile at DEVI. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 27, 2003 Report Share Posted November 27, 2003 No wonder my left eye are twitching all the time. You all are "gossiping" about me. LOL. [ Wink , Wink ] 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.