Guest guest Posted June 17, 2004 Report Share Posted June 17, 2004 Namaste MA No, that is not what I am suggesting. I am suggesting practicing the Stotram to understand & experience the Stotram. For me to understand gender studies/politics unrest etc I must read and study about these things. Im not saying the Stotram is a cure for every ill in the World nor will practicing it make me or you magically omniscient. But if you want to understand it, practice it that is all. ~SE101 , "Mary Ann" <maryann@m...> wrote: > I respectfully disagree that it is best to disregard information of > social unrest such as what politics shows, and I encourage > incorporating the information to bring harmony rather than fighting. > Are you asking what Devi thinks of herself? Or what Amma thinks of > herself? I think she thinks about unconditional compassionate love > for all living beings, and I agree with that. > > Om Parashakyai Namah. > > > , "Satish Arigela" > <satisharigela> wrote: > > , "sunelectric101" > > <ouranian@l...> wrote: > > > Namaste DB & Pranams, > > > > > > I read your recent post regarding the Khadgamala Stotram. A > couple > > of > > > things come to mind. The real meaning and import of Tantrik > > symbolism > > > can only be grasped through Sadhana and explanation from a Guru. > > No > > > intellectualizing, no matter how erudite, well footnoted and > > backed > > > by scholars can ever take the place of the expereince that comes > > from > > > Sadhana. > > > > > > Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to imply that Srividya is a > > cult > > > of anti-intellectualism or a celebration of "know nothingness" > but > > > intellectual understanding is *at best* only auxillary to > > > *experiencing* what the symbols are pointing to. Too much > > > intellectualizing about these things without Sadhana is playing > > with > > > the surfaces of Srividya. It may be entertaining and even > > > illuminating but it is still surfaces. > > > > Right! Not just entertaining, but it may even work the opposite > way, > > as we can see from DB's mention of that strange and disrespectful > > attitude displayed towards Khadgamala by that individual(what does > > she think of herself?). > > This is what happens when it falls into unworthy hands. > > > > > > > My 2 cents on Siva/Sakti & the Khadgamala Stotram? > > > Put down the book on gender studies, pick up the Stotram and > chant > > > daily *over a long period of time* relax and observe the changes > > > within and without. Pray that Devi send you someone to clarify > > >your > > > mind and best explain that which you need to know. (winks at > > >Kochu) > > > > > > Best advice. You could have posted this a little earlier though. > > Strange that a stotra of such great value inspired gender > arguments, > > politics and irrelevant thoughts instead of spiritual ones. > > > > Enjoy! > > > > > > > > > > > > Somewhere in San Francisco having fun > > > > > > ~SE101 > > > > > > "One may be like a child, a madman, a king, > > > independent minded, like a lord hero.... > > > Effulgent One, the way to be is to act > > > howsoever one wills, knowing both Akula and Devi's Kula." > > > > > > (Kaula Jnana Nirnaya, XII. 3-6.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2004 Report Share Posted June 17, 2004 MA I have read this book a couple of times. But I will re-read it to be a good sport and I will email you as I go. ~SE101 , "Mary Ann" <maryann@m...> wrote: > I am game to work with the Stotram if you read Chalice & the Blade. > The book is on the Shakti Sadhana reading list and it's worth reading > if you can make it through. Some find it dense going. I loved it. So > far, that is my only recommendation. Thanks for asking > > , "sunelectric101" > <ouranian@l...> wrote: > > Namaste MA and Pranams, > > > > Regarding your reply below; OK I am game. > > I will pick up the gender studies if you will pick up the > > Stotram. What are the names of a couple of books that you like > > and would reccomend? > > > > > > ~SE101 > > > > > > > > > > > > , "Mary Ann" <maryann@m...> > > wrote: > > > I guess thousands of years without thinking and just acting are > not > > > responsible for the violence and oppression in the world? Pick up > > > your gender studies book and start learning to incorporate it and > > the > > > spiritual information together to bring unity and wholeness > rather > > > than compartmentalization and continued violence - that's my > > > observation, anyway, my 2 cents. Winks at Devi and Amma. > > > > > > , "sunelectric101" > > > <ouranian@l...> wrote: > > > > Namaste DB & Pranams, > > > > > > > > I read your recent post regarding the Khadgamala Stotram. A > > couple > > > of > > > > things come to mind. The real meaning and import of Tantrik > > > symbolism > > > > can only be grasped through Sadhana and explanation from a > Guru. > > No > > > > intellectualizing, no matter how erudite, well footnoted and > > backed > > > > by scholars can ever take the place of the expereince that > comes > > > from > > > > Sadhana. > > > > > > > > Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to imply that Srividya is a > > > cult > > > > of anti-intellectualism or a celebration of "know nothingness" > > but > > > > intellectual understanding is *at best* only auxillary to > > > > *experiencing* what the symbols are pointing to. Too much > > > > intellectualizing about these things without Sadhana is playing > > > with > > > > the surfaces of Srividya. It may be entertaining and even > > > > illuminating but it is still surfaces. > > > > > > > > My 2 cents on Siva/Sakti & the Khadgamala Stotram? > > > > Put down the book on gender studies, pick up the Stotram and > > chant > > > > daily *over a long period of time* relax and observe the > changes > > > > within and without. Pray that Devi send you someone to clarify > > your > > > > mind and best explain that which you need to know. (winks at > > Kochu) > > > > > > > > Somewhere in San Francisco having fun > > > > > > > > ~SE101 > > > > > > > > "One may be like a child, a madman, a king, > > > > independent minded, like a lord hero.... > > > > Effulgent One, the way to be is to act > > > > howsoever one wills, knowing both Akula and Devi's Kula." > > > > > > > > (Kaula Jnana Nirnaya, XII. 3-6.) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , "Devi Bhakta" > > > > <devi_bhakta> wrote: > > > > > A member of the group yesterday sent me an interesting > comment > > on > > > > > the Khadgamala Stotram: basically, she found its core > symbolism > > > to > > > > > be off-putting -- and as a result is reluctant to try it. > Maybe > > > > > others among you have have reacted similarly, I don't know. > In > > > any > > > > > event, I felt it was merely a misunderstanding -- but I > thought > > > I'd > > > > > share my response, and invite other members to comment: > > > > > > > > > > The member told me she felt conceptually alienated from the > > > > > Khadgamala Stotram because, "For me, the symbolism of the > SWORD > > > and > > > > > the mention of COITUS was enough to send me away. The SWORD > is > > a > > > > > power symbol." Specifically, she said, one denoting > patriarchal > > > > > domination, as argued in Eisler's "The Chalice and the > Blade." > > > The > > > > > COITUS of Shakti and Shiva, for its part, was objectionable > > > because > > > > > it relied on rigidly enforced social codes and sexual roles. > > She > > > > > added an Indian correspondent had once told her that "he sees > > > > Shakti > > > > > as power. Hence, a sword. But I see Shakti as energy, > limitless > > > > > possibilities, including for conscious peace and prosperity - > > not > > > > as > > > > > a SWORD." > > > > > > > > > > My reply: > > > > > > > > > > I agree with your definition of power to a large extent, but > > not > > > > > with your interpretation of the symbolism in this particular > > case. > > > > > > > > > > Remember, the Sanskrit word 'SHAKTI' does in fact mean power, > > or > > > > > energy. The term 'Shakti Sadhana,' believe it or not, is > often > > > > > translated into English as 'The Cult of Power.' Sir John > > > > Woodroffe's > > > > > six-volume survey of Shakta theology and practice is > > > entitled 'The > > > > > World as Power.' But Woodroffe, like most commentators, goes > > out > > > of > > > > > his way to clarify that POWER does not imply any kind of > > earthly > > > > > coercive force. It simply means POWER as a universal force - - > a > > > > mere > > > > > synonym for ENERGY, really, which does in fact seem to be a > > much > > > > > less loaded, much more neutral term. > > > > > > > > > > So let's stick with ENERGY as the definition of SHAKTI. > > However, > > > > > let's first acknowledge that in fact POWER is the default > > > > > translation of the term by most English-speaking Indians. > Thus, > > I > > > > > would assume, [your correspondent's] use of the term was > quite > > > > > innocent. > > > > > > > > > > Whether you call it POWER or ENERGY, the meaning conveyed > does > > > > > indeed encompass yours: 'energy, limitless possibilities, > > > including > > > > > for conscious peace and prosperity.' It is *all* Energy, > > whether > > > > > perceived (from our perspective) as positive or negative in > > > effect. > > > > > Einstein said all matter is energy. Shaktism says everything > > that > > > > > is, is energy -- that it constitutes the three worlds, and > that > > > it > > > > > is all DEVI. SHIVA is the term for Consciousness. > Consciousness > > > > > energized by Power = the UNIVERSE. Energy animated by > > > CONSCIOUSNESS > > > > > = the UNIVERSE. Love -- the desire of SHAKTI and SHIVA to > > Unite -- > > > > > > > > is the essence of all Creation. > > > > > > > > > > That is where the term 'IN COITUS' comes in. That note in the > > > > > Khadgamala was mine; the Khadgamala itself says 'on the lap > > of' -- > > > > > > > > but Shaktas are very suspicious of this term, which is often > > > > > manipulated in mainstream Hinduism into a mini consort > goddess > > on > > > > > the lap of a gigantic Supreme God. The actual historical- > > > religious > > > > > meaning of the term is much more direct: They are having sex. > > As > > > > the > > > > > final verses of the Khadgamala clarify, the configuration is > > > Shakti > > > > > sitting atop the supine Shiva -- just as you so often see in > > > Shakta > > > > > (and even Shaiva) art. > > > > > > > > > > The meaning is that SHAKTI is here fully animated by > > > Consciousness - > > > > - > > > > > as noted elsewhere in the Stotram, She is in an eternal > state > > of > > > > > orgasm. The human sexual impulse is merely a metaphor for the > > > > Cosmic > > > > > Creative Impulse that created that all we see and do not see. > > Her > > > > > Energy (or Power, if you will) is fully animated and in a > state > > > of > > > > > active unfolding of Creation. The Stotram is inviting us to > > ride > > > > > that wave with Her; in essence, to become Her. > > > > > > > > > > As for the SWORD, I am aware of Eisler's "Chalice and the > > Blade" > > > > > analysis, and in general I find her argument to be > convincing. > > To > > > > be > > > > > fair, however, Shaktism -- and in fact, Hinduism as a whole -- > > > > has > > > > a > > > > > very different, very ancient saet of interpretations for > SWORD > > > > > iconography. Eisler's analysis, I think, applies to Persia > and > > > > > points West -- not to the very different > > iconographical/religious > > > > > histories of India, China, Japan, etc. > > > > > > > > > > In Hinduism, the SWORD virtually always symbolizes the power > > > > (Energy) > > > > > that enables us to transcend attachment, enabling Self- > > > Realization. > > > > > The Deity holds the SWORD (be the Deity female or male) as a > > > > promise > > > > > to her or his devotee that the Deity will be the portal > through > > > > > which this desireable goal can be achieved. > > > > > > > > > > That is the Sword referred to by the Khadgamala. As Amritaji > > > wrote, > > > > > specifically describing the Khadgamala's symbolism: "Khadga > > means > > > a > > > > > sword and mala means a garland. The Sword [metaphorically] > > severs > > > > > the head, separating body from mind. It can be interpreted > also > > > as > > > > > Wisdom -- that which separates, categorizes, and classifies. > So > > > > > it is a symbol of Knowledge. Khadgamala is about imagining a > > > > garland > > > > > of synergistic ideas, nourishing and protecting them and > > putting > > > > > life into them." > > > > > > > > > > To me, it sounds like you and he are talking about the same > > thing! > > > > > > > > > > [so ... any comments, corrections or other viewpoints? I'd > > > welcome > > > > > your input. ] > > > > > > > > > > Aum Maatangyai Namahe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2004 Report Share Posted June 17, 2004 You have read it and do not understand my posts? Hmm...not sure e- mails or posts will matter. What did you get from the book? If I think of anything further, I'll post. Otherwise, good luck, and enjoy the Khadga Mala Stotram. MAV , "sunelectric101" <ouranian@l...> wrote: > MA > > I have read this book a couple of times. But I will re-read it to be > a good sport and I will email you as I go. > > > ~SE101 > > > , "Mary Ann" <maryann@m...> > wrote: > > I am game to work with the Stotram if you read Chalice & the Blade. > > The book is on the Shakti Sadhana reading list and it's worth > reading > > if you can make it through. Some find it dense going. I loved it. > So > > far, that is my only recommendation. Thanks for asking > > > > , "sunelectric101" > > <ouranian@l...> wrote: > > > Namaste MA and Pranams, > > > > > > Regarding your reply below; OK I am game. > > > I will pick up the gender studies if you will pick up the > > > Stotram. What are the names of a couple of books that you like > > > and would reccomend? > > > > > > > > > ~SE101 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , "Mary Ann" <maryann@m...> > > > wrote: > > > > I guess thousands of years without thinking and just acting are > > not > > > > responsible for the violence and oppression in the world? Pick > up > > > > your gender studies book and start learning to incorporate it > and > > > the > > > > spiritual information together to bring unity and wholeness > > rather > > > > than compartmentalization and continued violence - that's my > > > > observation, anyway, my 2 cents. Winks at Devi and Amma. > > > > > > > > , "sunelectric101" > > > > <ouranian@l...> wrote: > > > > > Namaste DB & Pranams, > > > > > > > > > > I read your recent post regarding the Khadgamala Stotram. A > > > couple > > > > of > > > > > things come to mind. The real meaning and import of Tantrik > > > > symbolism > > > > > can only be grasped through Sadhana and explanation from a > > Guru. > > > No > > > > > intellectualizing, no matter how erudite, well footnoted and > > > backed > > > > > by scholars can ever take the place of the expereince that > > comes > > > > from > > > > > Sadhana. > > > > > > > > > > Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to imply that Srividya is > a > > > > cult > > > > > of anti-intellectualism or a celebration of "know > nothingness" > > > but > > > > > intellectual understanding is *at best* only auxillary to > > > > > *experiencing* what the symbols are pointing to. Too much > > > > > intellectualizing about these things without Sadhana is > playing > > > > with > > > > > the surfaces of Srividya. It may be entertaining and even > > > > > illuminating but it is still surfaces. > > > > > > > > > > My 2 cents on Siva/Sakti & the Khadgamala Stotram? > > > > > Put down the book on gender studies, pick up the Stotram and > > > chant > > > > > daily *over a long period of time* relax and observe the > > changes > > > > > within and without. Pray that Devi send you someone to > clarify > > > your > > > > > mind and best explain that which you need to know. (winks at > > > Kochu) > > > > > > > > > > Somewhere in San Francisco having fun > > > > > > > > > > ~SE101 > > > > > > > > > > "One may be like a child, a madman, a king, > > > > > independent minded, like a lord hero.... > > > > > Effulgent One, the way to be is to act > > > > > howsoever one wills, knowing both Akula and Devi's Kula." > > > > > > > > > > (Kaula Jnana Nirnaya, XII. 3-6.) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , "Devi Bhakta" > > > > > <devi_bhakta> wrote: > > > > > > A member of the group yesterday sent me an interesting > > comment > > > on > > > > > > the Khadgamala Stotram: basically, she found its core > > symbolism > > > > to > > > > > > be off-putting -- and as a result is reluctant to try it. > > Maybe > > > > > > others among you have have reacted similarly, I don't know. > > In > > > > any > > > > > > event, I felt it was merely a misunderstanding -- but I > > thought > > > > I'd > > > > > > share my response, and invite other members to comment: > > > > > > > > > > > > The member told me she felt conceptually alienated from the > > > > > > Khadgamala Stotram because, "For me, the symbolism of the > > SWORD > > > > and > > > > > > the mention of COITUS was enough to send me away. The SWORD > > is > > > a > > > > > > power symbol." Specifically, she said, one denoting > > patriarchal > > > > > > domination, as argued in Eisler's "The Chalice and the > > Blade." > > > > The > > > > > > COITUS of Shakti and Shiva, for its part, was objectionable > > > > because > > > > > > it relied on rigidly enforced social codes and sexual > roles. > > > She > > > > > > added an Indian correspondent had once told her that "he > sees > > > > > Shakti > > > > > > as power. Hence, a sword. But I see Shakti as energy, > > limitless > > > > > > possibilities, including for conscious peace and > prosperity - > > > not > > > > > as > > > > > > a SWORD." > > > > > > > > > > > > My reply: > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree with your definition of power to a large extent, > but > > > not > > > > > > with your interpretation of the symbolism in this > particular > > > case. > > > > > > > > > > > > Remember, the Sanskrit word 'SHAKTI' does in fact mean > power, > > > or > > > > > > energy. The term 'Shakti Sadhana,' believe it or not, is > > often > > > > > > translated into English as 'The Cult of Power.' Sir John > > > > > Woodroffe's > > > > > > six-volume survey of Shakta theology and practice is > > > > entitled 'The > > > > > > World as Power.' But Woodroffe, like most commentators, > goes > > > out > > > > of > > > > > > his way to clarify that POWER does not imply any kind of > > > earthly > > > > > > coercive force. It simply means POWER as a universal force - > - > > a > > > > > mere > > > > > > synonym for ENERGY, really, which does in fact seem to be a > > > much > > > > > > less loaded, much more neutral term. > > > > > > > > > > > > So let's stick with ENERGY as the definition of SHAKTI. > > > However, > > > > > > let's first acknowledge that in fact POWER is the default > > > > > > translation of the term by most English-speaking Indians. > > Thus, > > > I > > > > > > would assume, [your correspondent's] use of the term was > > quite > > > > > > innocent. > > > > > > > > > > > > Whether you call it POWER or ENERGY, the meaning conveyed > > does > > > > > > indeed encompass yours: 'energy, limitless possibilities, > > > > including > > > > > > for conscious peace and prosperity.' It is *all* Energy, > > > whether > > > > > > perceived (from our perspective) as positive or negative in > > > > effect. > > > > > > Einstein said all matter is energy. Shaktism says > everything > > > that > > > > > > is, is energy -- that it constitutes the three worlds, and > > that > > > > it > > > > > > is all DEVI. SHIVA is the term for Consciousness. > > Consciousness > > > > > > energized by Power = the UNIVERSE. Energy animated by > > > > CONSCIOUSNESS > > > > > > = the UNIVERSE. Love -- the desire of SHAKTI and SHIVA to > > > Unite -- > > > > > > > > > > is the essence of all Creation. > > > > > > > > > > > > That is where the term 'IN COITUS' comes in. That note in > the > > > > > > Khadgamala was mine; the Khadgamala itself says 'on the lap > > > of' -- > > > > > > > > > > but Shaktas are very suspicious of this term, which is > often > > > > > > manipulated in mainstream Hinduism into a mini consort > > goddess > > > on > > > > > > the lap of a gigantic Supreme God. The actual historical- > > > > religious > > > > > > meaning of the term is much more direct: They are having > sex. > > > As > > > > > the > > > > > > final verses of the Khadgamala clarify, the configuration > is > > > > Shakti > > > > > > sitting atop the supine Shiva -- just as you so often see > in > > > > Shakta > > > > > > (and even Shaiva) art. > > > > > > > > > > > > The meaning is that SHAKTI is here fully animated by > > > > Consciousness - > > > > > - > > > > > > as noted elsewhere in the Stotram, She is in an eternal > > state > > > of > > > > > > orgasm. The human sexual impulse is merely a metaphor for > the > > > > > Cosmic > > > > > > Creative Impulse that created that all we see and do not > see. > > > Her > > > > > > Energy (or Power, if you will) is fully animated and in a > > state > > > > of > > > > > > active unfolding of Creation. The Stotram is inviting us to > > > ride > > > > > > that wave with Her; in essence, to become Her. > > > > > > > > > > > > As for the SWORD, I am aware of Eisler's "Chalice and the > > > Blade" > > > > > > analysis, and in general I find her argument to be > > convincing. > > > To > > > > > be > > > > > > fair, however, Shaktism -- and in fact, Hinduism as a > whole -- > > > > > > has > > > > > a > > > > > > very different, very ancient saet of interpretations for > > SWORD > > > > > > iconography. Eisler's analysis, I think, applies to Persia > > and > > > > > > points West -- not to the very different > > > iconographical/religious > > > > > > histories of India, China, Japan, etc. > > > > > > > > > > > > In Hinduism, the SWORD virtually always symbolizes the > power > > > > > (Energy) > > > > > > that enables us to transcend attachment, enabling Self- > > > > Realization. > > > > > > The Deity holds the SWORD (be the Deity female or male) as > a > > > > > promise > > > > > > to her or his devotee that the Deity will be the portal > > through > > > > > > which this desireable goal can be achieved. > > > > > > > > > > > > That is the Sword referred to by the Khadgamala. As > Amritaji > > > > wrote, > > > > > > specifically describing the Khadgamala's symbolism: "Khadga > > > means > > > > a > > > > > > sword and mala means a garland. The Sword [metaphorically] > > > severs > > > > > > the head, separating body from mind. It can be interpreted > > also > > > > as > > > > > > Wisdom -- that which separates, categorizes, and > classifies. > > So > > > > > > it is a symbol of Knowledge. Khadgamala is about imagining > a > > > > > garland > > > > > > of synergistic ideas, nourishing and protecting them and > > > putting > > > > > > life into them." > > > > > > > > > > > > To me, it sounds like you and he are talking about the same > > > thing! > > > > > > > > > > > > [so ... any comments, corrections or other viewpoints? I'd > > > > welcome > > > > > > your input. ] > > > > > > > > > > > > Aum Maatangyai Namahe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2004 Report Share Posted June 17, 2004 On the contrary I do understand your posts, Mary Ann. Chant the KS and you will understand mine. : ) ~SE101 , "Mary Ann" <maryann@m...> wrote: > You have read it and do not understand my posts? Hmm...not sure e- > mails or posts will matter. What did you get from the book? If I > think of anything further, I'll post. Otherwise, good luck, and enjoy > the Khadga Mala Stotram. > > MAV > > , "sunelectric101" > <ouranian@l...> wrote: > > MA > > > > I have read this book a couple of times. But I will re-read it to > be > > a good sport and I will email you as I go. > > > > > > ~SE101 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , "Mary Ann" <maryann@m...> > > wrote: > > > I am game to work with the Stotram if you read Chalice & the > Blade. > > > The book is on the Shakti Sadhana reading list and it's worth > > reading > > > if you can make it through. Some find it dense going. I loved it. > > So > > > far, that is my only recommendation. Thanks for asking > > > > > > , "sunelectric101" > > > <ouranian@l...> wrote: > > > > Namaste MA and Pranams, > > > > > > > > Regarding your reply below; OK I am game. > > > > I will pick up the gender studies if you will pick up the > > > > Stotram. What are the names of a couple of books that you like > > > > and would reccomend? > > > > > > > > > > > > ~SE101 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , "Mary Ann" > <maryann@m...> > > > > wrote: > > > > > I guess thousands of years without thinking and just acting > are > > > not > > > > > responsible for the violence and oppression in the world? > Pick > > up > > > > > your gender studies book and start learning to incorporate it > > and > > > > the > > > > > spiritual information together to bring unity and wholeness > > > rather > > > > > than compartmentalization and continued violence - that's my > > > > > observation, anyway, my 2 cents. Winks at Devi and Amma. > > > > > > > > > > , "sunelectric101" > > > > > <ouranian@l...> wrote: > > > > > > Namaste DB & Pranams, > > > > > > > > > > > > I read your recent post regarding the Khadgamala Stotram. A > > > > couple > > > > > of > > > > > > things come to mind. The real meaning and import of Tantrik > > > > > symbolism > > > > > > can only be grasped through Sadhana and explanation from a > > > Guru. > > > > No > > > > > > intellectualizing, no matter how erudite, well footnoted > and > > > > backed > > > > > > by scholars can ever take the place of the expereince that > > > comes > > > > > from > > > > > > Sadhana. > > > > > > > > > > > > Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to imply that Srividya > is > > a > > > > > cult > > > > > > of anti-intellectualism or a celebration of "know > > nothingness" > > > > but > > > > > > intellectual understanding is *at best* only auxillary to > > > > > > *experiencing* what the symbols are pointing to. Too much > > > > > > intellectualizing about these things without Sadhana is > > playing > > > > > with > > > > > > the surfaces of Srividya. It may be entertaining and even > > > > > > illuminating but it is still surfaces. > > > > > > > > > > > > My 2 cents on Siva/Sakti & the Khadgamala Stotram? > > > > > > Put down the book on gender studies, pick up the Stotram > and > > > > chant > > > > > > daily *over a long period of time* relax and observe the > > > changes > > > > > > within and without. Pray that Devi send you someone to > > clarify > > > > your > > > > > > mind and best explain that which you need to know. (winks > at > > > > Kochu) > > > > > > > > > > > > Somewhere in San Francisco having fun > > > > > > > > > > > > ~SE101 > > > > > > > > > > > > "One may be like a child, a madman, a king, > > > > > > independent minded, like a lord hero.... > > > > > > Effulgent One, the way to be is to act > > > > > > howsoever one wills, knowing both Akula and Devi's Kula." > > > > > > > > > > > > (Kaula Jnana Nirnaya, XII. 3-6.) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , "Devi Bhakta" > > > > > > <devi_bhakta> wrote: > > > > > > > A member of the group yesterday sent me an interesting > > > comment > > > > on > > > > > > > the Khadgamala Stotram: basically, she found its core > > > symbolism > > > > > to > > > > > > > be off-putting -- and as a result is reluctant to try it. > > > Maybe > > > > > > > others among you have have reacted similarly, I don't > know. > > > In > > > > > any > > > > > > > event, I felt it was merely a misunderstanding -- but I > > > thought > > > > > I'd > > > > > > > share my response, and invite other members to comment: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The member told me she felt conceptually alienated from > the > > > > > > > Khadgamala Stotram because, "For me, the symbolism of the > > > SWORD > > > > > and > > > > > > > the mention of COITUS was enough to send me away. The > SWORD > > > is > > > > a > > > > > > > power symbol." Specifically, she said, one denoting > > > patriarchal > > > > > > > domination, as argued in Eisler's "The Chalice and the > > > Blade." > > > > > The > > > > > > > COITUS of Shakti and Shiva, for its part, was > objectionable > > > > > because > > > > > > > it relied on rigidly enforced social codes and sexual > > roles. > > > > She > > > > > > > added an Indian correspondent had once told her that "he > > sees > > > > > > Shakti > > > > > > > as power. Hence, a sword. But I see Shakti as energy, > > > limitless > > > > > > > possibilities, including for conscious peace and > > prosperity - > > > > not > > > > > > as > > > > > > > a SWORD." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My reply: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree with your definition of power to a large extent, > > but > > > > not > > > > > > > with your interpretation of the symbolism in this > > particular > > > > case. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Remember, the Sanskrit word 'SHAKTI' does in fact mean > > power, > > > > or > > > > > > > energy. The term 'Shakti Sadhana,' believe it or not, is > > > often > > > > > > > translated into English as 'The Cult of Power.' Sir John > > > > > > Woodroffe's > > > > > > > six-volume survey of Shakta theology and practice is > > > > > entitled 'The > > > > > > > World as Power.' But Woodroffe, like most commentators, > > goes > > > > out > > > > > of > > > > > > > his way to clarify that POWER does not imply any kind of > > > > earthly > > > > > > > coercive force. It simply means POWER as a universal > force - > > - > > > a > > > > > > mere > > > > > > > synonym for ENERGY, really, which does in fact seem to be > a > > > > much > > > > > > > less loaded, much more neutral term. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So let's stick with ENERGY as the definition of SHAKTI. > > > > However, > > > > > > > let's first acknowledge that in fact POWER is the default > > > > > > > translation of the term by most English-speaking Indians. > > > Thus, > > > > I > > > > > > > would assume, [your correspondent's] use of the term was > > > quite > > > > > > > innocent. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Whether you call it POWER or ENERGY, the meaning conveyed > > > does > > > > > > > indeed encompass yours: 'energy, limitless possibilities, > > > > > including > > > > > > > for conscious peace and prosperity.' It is *all* Energy, > > > > whether > > > > > > > perceived (from our perspective) as positive or negative > in > > > > > effect. > > > > > > > Einstein said all matter is energy. Shaktism says > > everything > > > > that > > > > > > > is, is energy -- that it constitutes the three worlds, > and > > > that > > > > > it > > > > > > > is all DEVI. SHIVA is the term for Consciousness. > > > Consciousness > > > > > > > energized by Power = the UNIVERSE. Energy animated by > > > > > CONSCIOUSNESS > > > > > > > = the UNIVERSE. Love -- the desire of SHAKTI and SHIVA to > > > > Unite -- > > > > > > > > > > > > is the essence of all Creation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That is where the term 'IN COITUS' comes in. That note in > > the > > > > > > > Khadgamala was mine; the Khadgamala itself says 'on the > lap > > > > of' -- > > > > > > > > > > > > but Shaktas are very suspicious of this term, which is > > often > > > > > > > manipulated in mainstream Hinduism into a mini consort > > > goddess > > > > on > > > > > > > the lap of a gigantic Supreme God. The actual historical- > > > > > religious > > > > > > > meaning of the term is much more direct: They are having > > sex. > > > > As > > > > > > the > > > > > > > final verses of the Khadgamala clarify, the configuration > > is > > > > > Shakti > > > > > > > sitting atop the supine Shiva -- just as you so often see > > in > > > > > Shakta > > > > > > > (and even Shaiva) art. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The meaning is that SHAKTI is here fully animated by > > > > > Consciousness - > > > > > > - > > > > > > > as noted elsewhere in the Stotram, She is in an eternal > > > state > > > > of > > > > > > > orgasm. The human sexual impulse is merely a metaphor for > > the > > > > > > Cosmic > > > > > > > Creative Impulse that created that all we see and do not > > see. > > > > Her > > > > > > > Energy (or Power, if you will) is fully animated and in a > > > state > > > > > of > > > > > > > active unfolding of Creation. The Stotram is inviting us > to > > > > ride > > > > > > > that wave with Her; in essence, to become Her. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As for the SWORD, I am aware of Eisler's "Chalice and the > > > > Blade" > > > > > > > analysis, and in general I find her argument to be > > > convincing. > > > > To > > > > > > be > > > > > > > fair, however, Shaktism -- and in fact, Hinduism as a > > whole -- > > > > > > > > has > > > > > > a > > > > > > > very different, very ancient saet of interpretations for > > > SWORD > > > > > > > iconography. Eisler's analysis, I think, applies to > Persia > > > and > > > > > > > points West -- not to the very different > > > > iconographical/religious > > > > > > > histories of India, China, Japan, etc. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In Hinduism, the SWORD virtually always symbolizes the > > power > > > > > > (Energy) > > > > > > > that enables us to transcend attachment, enabling Self- > > > > > Realization. > > > > > > > The Deity holds the SWORD (be the Deity female or male) > as > > a > > > > > > promise > > > > > > > to her or his devotee that the Deity will be the portal > > > through > > > > > > > which this desireable goal can be achieved. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That is the Sword referred to by the Khadgamala. As > > Amritaji > > > > > wrote, > > > > > > > specifically describing the Khadgamala's > symbolism: "Khadga > > > > means > > > > > a > > > > > > > sword and mala means a garland. The Sword > [metaphorically] > > > > severs > > > > > > > the head, separating body from mind. It can be > interpreted > > > also > > > > > as > > > > > > > Wisdom -- that which separates, categorizes, and > > classifies. > > > So > > > > > > > it is a symbol of Knowledge. Khadgamala is about > imagining > > a > > > > > > garland > > > > > > > of synergistic ideas, nourishing and protecting them and > > > > putting > > > > > > > life into them." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To me, it sounds like you and he are talking about the > same > > > > thing! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [so ... any comments, corrections or other viewpoints? > I'd > > > > > welcome > > > > > > > your input. ] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Aum Maatangyai Namahe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2004 Report Share Posted June 17, 2004 Is chanting the 108 names effective too, or only Khadga Mala Stotram? What about doing seva? What about chanting mantra given by guru? , "sunelectric101" <ouranian@l...> wrote: > On the contrary I do understand your posts, Mary Ann. > Chant the KS and you will understand mine. : ) > > > ~SE101 > > > > , "Mary Ann" <maryann@m...> > wrote: > > You have read it and do not understand my posts? Hmm...not sure e- > > mails or posts will matter. What did you get from the book? If I > > think of anything further, I'll post. Otherwise, good luck, and > enjoy > > the Khadga Mala Stotram. > > > > MAV > > > > , "sunelectric101" > > <ouranian@l...> wrote: > > > MA > > > > > > I have read this book a couple of times. But I will re-read it > to > > be > > > a good sport and I will email you as I go. > > > > > > > > > ~SE101 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , "Mary Ann" <maryann@m...> > > > wrote: > > > > I am game to work with the Stotram if you read Chalice & the > > Blade. > > > > The book is on the Shakti Sadhana reading list and it's worth > > > reading > > > > if you can make it through. Some find it dense going. I loved > it. > > > So > > > > far, that is my only recommendation. Thanks for asking > > > > > > > > , "sunelectric101" > > > > <ouranian@l...> wrote: > > > > > Namaste MA and Pranams, > > > > > > > > > > Regarding your reply below; OK I am game. > > > > > I will pick up the gender studies if you will pick up the > > > > > Stotram. What are the names of a couple of books that you like > > > > > and would reccomend? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ~SE101 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , "Mary Ann" > > <maryann@m...> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > I guess thousands of years without thinking and just acting > > are > > > > not > > > > > > responsible for the violence and oppression in the world? > > Pick > > > up > > > > > > your gender studies book and start learning to incorporate > it > > > and > > > > > the > > > > > > spiritual information together to bring unity and wholeness > > > > rather > > > > > > than compartmentalization and continued violence - that's > my > > > > > > observation, anyway, my 2 cents. Winks at Devi and Amma. > > > > > > > > > > > > , "sunelectric101" > > > > > > <ouranian@l...> wrote: > > > > > > > Namaste DB & Pranams, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I read your recent post regarding the Khadgamala Stotram. > A > > > > > couple > > > > > > of > > > > > > > things come to mind. The real meaning and import of > Tantrik > > > > > > symbolism > > > > > > > can only be grasped through Sadhana and explanation from > a > > > > Guru. > > > > > No > > > > > > > intellectualizing, no matter how erudite, well footnoted > > and > > > > > backed > > > > > > > by scholars can ever take the place of the expereince > that > > > > comes > > > > > > from > > > > > > > Sadhana. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to imply that > Srividya > > is > > > a > > > > > > cult > > > > > > > of anti-intellectualism or a celebration of "know > > > nothingness" > > > > > but > > > > > > > intellectual understanding is *at best* only auxillary to > > > > > > > *experiencing* what the symbols are pointing to. Too much > > > > > > > intellectualizing about these things without Sadhana is > > > playing > > > > > > with > > > > > > > the surfaces of Srividya. It may be entertaining and even > > > > > > > illuminating but it is still surfaces. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My 2 cents on Siva/Sakti & the Khadgamala Stotram? > > > > > > > Put down the book on gender studies, pick up the Stotram > > and > > > > > chant > > > > > > > daily *over a long period of time* relax and observe the > > > > changes > > > > > > > within and without. Pray that Devi send you someone to > > > clarify > > > > > your > > > > > > > mind and best explain that which you need to know. (winks > > at > > > > > Kochu) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Somewhere in San Francisco having fun > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ~SE101 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "One may be like a child, a madman, a king, > > > > > > > independent minded, like a lord hero.... > > > > > > > Effulgent One, the way to be is to act > > > > > > > howsoever one wills, knowing both Akula and Devi's Kula." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (Kaula Jnana Nirnaya, XII. 3-6.) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , "Devi Bhakta" > > > > > > > <devi_bhakta> wrote: > > > > > > > > A member of the group yesterday sent me an interesting > > > > comment > > > > > on > > > > > > > > the Khadgamala Stotram: basically, she found its core > > > > symbolism > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > be off-putting -- and as a result is reluctant to try > it. > > > > Maybe > > > > > > > > others among you have have reacted similarly, I don't > > know. > > > > In > > > > > > any > > > > > > > > event, I felt it was merely a misunderstanding -- but I > > > > thought > > > > > > I'd > > > > > > > > share my response, and invite other members to comment: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The member told me she felt conceptually alienated from > > the > > > > > > > > Khadgamala Stotram because, "For me, the symbolism of > the > > > > SWORD > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > the mention of COITUS was enough to send me away. The > > SWORD > > > > is > > > > > a > > > > > > > > power symbol." Specifically, she said, one denoting > > > > patriarchal > > > > > > > > domination, as argued in Eisler's "The Chalice and the > > > > Blade." > > > > > > The > > > > > > > > COITUS of Shakti and Shiva, for its part, was > > objectionable > > > > > > because > > > > > > > > it relied on rigidly enforced social codes and sexual > > > roles. > > > > > She > > > > > > > > added an Indian correspondent had once told her > that "he > > > sees > > > > > > > Shakti > > > > > > > > as power. Hence, a sword. But I see Shakti as energy, > > > > limitless > > > > > > > > possibilities, including for conscious peace and > > > prosperity - > > > > > not > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > a SWORD." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My reply: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree with your definition of power to a large > extent, > > > but > > > > > not > > > > > > > > with your interpretation of the symbolism in this > > > particular > > > > > case. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Remember, the Sanskrit word 'SHAKTI' does in fact mean > > > power, > > > > > or > > > > > > > > energy. The term 'Shakti Sadhana,' believe it or not, > is > > > > often > > > > > > > > translated into English as 'The Cult of Power.' Sir > John > > > > > > > Woodroffe's > > > > > > > > six-volume survey of Shakta theology and practice is > > > > > > entitled 'The > > > > > > > > World as Power.' But Woodroffe, like most commentators, > > > goes > > > > > out > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > his way to clarify that POWER does not imply any kind > of > > > > > earthly > > > > > > > > coercive force. It simply means POWER as a universal > > force - > > > - > > > > a > > > > > > > mere > > > > > > > > synonym for ENERGY, really, which does in fact seem to > be > > a > > > > > much > > > > > > > > less loaded, much more neutral term. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So let's stick with ENERGY as the definition of SHAKTI. > > > > > However, > > > > > > > > let's first acknowledge that in fact POWER is the > default > > > > > > > > translation of the term by most English-speaking > Indians. > > > > Thus, > > > > > I > > > > > > > > would assume, [your correspondent's] use of the term > was > > > > quite > > > > > > > > innocent. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Whether you call it POWER or ENERGY, the meaning > conveyed > > > > does > > > > > > > > indeed encompass yours: 'energy, limitless > possibilities, > > > > > > including > > > > > > > > for conscious peace and prosperity.' It is *all* > Energy, > > > > > whether > > > > > > > > perceived (from our perspective) as positive or > negative > > in > > > > > > effect. > > > > > > > > Einstein said all matter is energy. Shaktism says > > > everything > > > > > that > > > > > > > > is, is energy -- that it constitutes the three worlds, > > and > > > > that > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > is all DEVI. SHIVA is the term for Consciousness. > > > > Consciousness > > > > > > > > energized by Power = the UNIVERSE. Energy animated by > > > > > > CONSCIOUSNESS > > > > > > > > = the UNIVERSE. Love -- the desire of SHAKTI and SHIVA > to > > > > > Unite -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is the essence of all Creation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That is where the term 'IN COITUS' comes in. That note > in > > > the > > > > > > > > Khadgamala was mine; the Khadgamala itself says 'on the > > lap > > > > > of' -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but Shaktas are very suspicious of this term, which is > > > often > > > > > > > > manipulated in mainstream Hinduism into a mini consort > > > > goddess > > > > > on > > > > > > > > the lap of a gigantic Supreme God. The actual > historical- > > > > > > religious > > > > > > > > meaning of the term is much more direct: They are > having > > > sex. > > > > > As > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > final verses of the Khadgamala clarify, the > configuration > > > is > > > > > > Shakti > > > > > > > > sitting atop the supine Shiva -- just as you so often > see > > > in > > > > > > Shakta > > > > > > > > (and even Shaiva) art. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The meaning is that SHAKTI is here fully animated by > > > > > > Consciousness - > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > > as noted elsewhere in the Stotram, She is in an > eternal > > > > state > > > > > of > > > > > > > > orgasm. The human sexual impulse is merely a metaphor > for > > > the > > > > > > > Cosmic > > > > > > > > Creative Impulse that created that all we see and do > not > > > see. > > > > > Her > > > > > > > > Energy (or Power, if you will) is fully animated and in > a > > > > state > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > active unfolding of Creation. The Stotram is inviting > us > > to > > > > > ride > > > > > > > > that wave with Her; in essence, to become Her. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As for the SWORD, I am aware of Eisler's "Chalice and > the > > > > > Blade" > > > > > > > > analysis, and in general I find her argument to be > > > > convincing. > > > > > To > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > fair, however, Shaktism -- and in fact, Hinduism as a > > > whole -- > > > > > > > > > > has > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > very different, very ancient saet of interpretations > for > > > > SWORD > > > > > > > > iconography. Eisler's analysis, I think, applies to > > Persia > > > > and > > > > > > > > points West -- not to the very different > > > > > iconographical/religious > > > > > > > > histories of India, China, Japan, etc. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In Hinduism, the SWORD virtually always symbolizes the > > > power > > > > > > > (Energy) > > > > > > > > that enables us to transcend attachment, enabling Self- > > > > > > Realization. > > > > > > > > The Deity holds the SWORD (be the Deity female or male) > > as > > > a > > > > > > > promise > > > > > > > > to her or his devotee that the Deity will be the portal > > > > through > > > > > > > > which this desireable goal can be achieved. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That is the Sword referred to by the Khadgamala. As > > > Amritaji > > > > > > wrote, > > > > > > > > specifically describing the Khadgamala's > > symbolism: "Khadga > > > > > means > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > sword and mala means a garland. The Sword > > [metaphorically] > > > > > severs > > > > > > > > the head, separating body from mind. It can be > > interpreted > > > > also > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > Wisdom -- that which separates, categorizes, and > > > classifies. > > > > So > > > > > > > > it is a symbol of Knowledge. Khadgamala is about > > imagining > > > a > > > > > > > garland > > > > > > > > of synergistic ideas, nourishing and protecting them > and > > > > > putting > > > > > > > > life into them." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To me, it sounds like you and he are talking about the > > same > > > > > thing! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [so ... any comments, corrections or other viewpoints? > > I'd > > > > > > welcome > > > > > > > > your input. ] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Aum Maatangyai Namahe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2004 Report Share Posted June 17, 2004 Good Afternoon Mary Ann, My comments are in reference to the KS only. If you have received a mantra from a Guru that is between you and your Guru. Other Stotrams are effective in other ways. I will leave that issue to the more advanced and learned amongst us here to comment or not comment on. My focus, as far as Sadhana goes, is rather narrowed to a couple of things. I have not been given any instruction or guidance regarding the wide range of Stotrams, Mantras, Sadhanas & Pujas that are a part of the Ocean of Srividya. I am content with my view from the shore at the moment & leave them for another day. ~SE101 , "Mary Ann" <maryann@m...> wrote: > Is chanting the 108 names effective too, or only Khadga Mala Stotram? > What about doing seva? What about chanting mantra given by guru? > > , "sunelectric101" > <ouranian@l...> wrote: > > On the contrary I do understand your posts, Mary Ann. > > Chant the KS and you will understand mine. : ) > > > > > > ~SE101 > > > > > > > > , "Mary Ann" <maryann@m...> > > wrote: > > > You have read it and do not understand my posts? Hmm...not sure e- > > > mails or posts will matter. What did you get from the book? If I > > > think of anything further, I'll post. Otherwise, good luck, and > > enjoy > > > the Khadga Mala Stotram. > > > > > > MAV > > > > > > , "sunelectric101" > > > <ouranian@l...> wrote: > > > > MA > > > > > > > > I have read this book a couple of times. But I will re-read it > > to > > > be > > > > a good sport and I will email you as I go. > > > > > > > > > > > > ~SE101 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , "Mary Ann" > <maryann@m...> > > > > wrote: > > > > > I am game to work with the Stotram if you read Chalice & the > > > Blade. > > > > > The book is on the Shakti Sadhana reading list and it's worth > > > > reading > > > > > if you can make it through. Some find it dense going. I loved > > it. > > > > So > > > > > far, that is my only recommendation. Thanks for asking > > > > > > > > > > , "sunelectric101" > > > > > <ouranian@l...> wrote: > > > > > > Namaste MA and Pranams, > > > > > > > > > > > > Regarding your reply below; OK I am game. > > > > > > I will pick up the gender studies if you will pick up the > > > > > > Stotram. What are the names of a couple of books that you > like > > > > > > and would reccomend? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ~SE101 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , "Mary Ann" > > > <maryann@m...> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > I guess thousands of years without thinking and just > acting > > > are > > > > > not > > > > > > > responsible for the violence and oppression in the world? > > > Pick > > > > up > > > > > > > your gender studies book and start learning to > incorporate > > it > > > > and > > > > > > the > > > > > > > spiritual information together to bring unity and > wholeness > > > > > rather > > > > > > > than compartmentalization and continued violence - that's > > my > > > > > > > observation, anyway, my 2 cents. Winks at Devi and Amma. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , "sunelectric101" > > > > > > > <ouranian@l...> wrote: > > > > > > > > Namaste DB & Pranams, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I read your recent post regarding the Khadgamala > Stotram. > > A > > > > > > couple > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > things come to mind. The real meaning and import of > > Tantrik > > > > > > > symbolism > > > > > > > > can only be grasped through Sadhana and explanation > from > > a > > > > > Guru. > > > > > > No > > > > > > > > intellectualizing, no matter how erudite, well > footnoted > > > and > > > > > > backed > > > > > > > > by scholars can ever take the place of the expereince > > that > > > > > comes > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > Sadhana. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to imply that > > Srividya > > > is > > > > a > > > > > > > cult > > > > > > > > of anti-intellectualism or a celebration of "know > > > > nothingness" > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > intellectual understanding is *at best* only auxillary > to > > > > > > > > *experiencing* what the symbols are pointing to. Too > much > > > > > > > > intellectualizing about these things without Sadhana is > > > > playing > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > the surfaces of Srividya. It may be entertaining and > even > > > > > > > > illuminating but it is still surfaces. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My 2 cents on Siva/Sakti & the Khadgamala Stotram? > > > > > > > > Put down the book on gender studies, pick up the > Stotram > > > and > > > > > > chant > > > > > > > > daily *over a long period of time* relax and observe > the > > > > > changes > > > > > > > > within and without. Pray that Devi send you someone to > > > > clarify > > > > > > your > > > > > > > > mind and best explain that which you need to know. > (winks > > > at > > > > > > Kochu) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Somewhere in San Francisco having fun > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ~SE101 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "One may be like a child, a madman, a king, > > > > > > > > independent minded, like a lord hero.... > > > > > > > > Effulgent One, the way to be is to act > > > > > > > > howsoever one wills, knowing both Akula and Devi's > Kula." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (Kaula Jnana Nirnaya, XII. 3-6.) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , "Devi Bhakta" > > > > > > > > <devi_bhakta> wrote: > > > > > > > > > A member of the group yesterday sent me an > interesting > > > > > comment > > > > > > on > > > > > > > > > the Khadgamala Stotram: basically, she found its core > > > > > symbolism > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > be off-putting -- and as a result is reluctant to try > > it. > > > > > Maybe > > > > > > > > > others among you have have reacted similarly, I don't > > > know. > > > > > In > > > > > > > any > > > > > > > > > event, I felt it was merely a misunderstanding -- but > I > > > > > thought > > > > > > > I'd > > > > > > > > > share my response, and invite other members to > comment: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The member told me she felt conceptually alienated > from > > > the > > > > > > > > > Khadgamala Stotram because, "For me, the symbolism of > > the > > > > > SWORD > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > the mention of COITUS was enough to send me away. The > > > SWORD > > > > > is > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > power symbol." Specifically, she said, one denoting > > > > > patriarchal > > > > > > > > > domination, as argued in Eisler's "The Chalice and > the > > > > > Blade." > > > > > > > The > > > > > > > > > COITUS of Shakti and Shiva, for its part, was > > > objectionable > > > > > > > because > > > > > > > > > it relied on rigidly enforced social codes and sexual > > > > roles. > > > > > > She > > > > > > > > > added an Indian correspondent had once told her > > that "he > > > > sees > > > > > > > > Shakti > > > > > > > > > as power. Hence, a sword. But I see Shakti as energy, > > > > > limitless > > > > > > > > > possibilities, including for conscious peace and > > > > prosperity - > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > a SWORD." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My reply: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree with your definition of power to a large > > extent, > > > > but > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > with your interpretation of the symbolism in this > > > > particular > > > > > > case. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Remember, the Sanskrit word 'SHAKTI' does in fact > mean > > > > power, > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > energy. The term 'Shakti Sadhana,' believe it or not, > > is > > > > > often > > > > > > > > > translated into English as 'The Cult of Power.' Sir > > John > > > > > > > > Woodroffe's > > > > > > > > > six-volume survey of Shakta theology and practice is > > > > > > > entitled 'The > > > > > > > > > World as Power.' But Woodroffe, like most > commentators, > > > > goes > > > > > > out > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > his way to clarify that POWER does not imply any kind > > of > > > > > > earthly > > > > > > > > > coercive force. It simply means POWER as a universal > > > force - > > > > - > > > > > a > > > > > > > > mere > > > > > > > > > synonym for ENERGY, really, which does in fact seem > to > > be > > > a > > > > > > much > > > > > > > > > less loaded, much more neutral term. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So let's stick with ENERGY as the definition of > SHAKTI. > > > > > > However, > > > > > > > > > let's first acknowledge that in fact POWER is the > > default > > > > > > > > > translation of the term by most English-speaking > > Indians. > > > > > Thus, > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > > would assume, [your correspondent's] use of the term > > was > > > > > quite > > > > > > > > > innocent. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Whether you call it POWER or ENERGY, the meaning > > conveyed > > > > > does > > > > > > > > > indeed encompass yours: 'energy, limitless > > possibilities, > > > > > > > including > > > > > > > > > for conscious peace and prosperity.' It is *all* > > Energy, > > > > > > whether > > > > > > > > > perceived (from our perspective) as positive or > > negative > > > in > > > > > > > effect. > > > > > > > > > Einstein said all matter is energy. Shaktism says > > > > everything > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > is, is energy -- that it constitutes the three > worlds, > > > and > > > > > that > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > is all DEVI. SHIVA is the term for Consciousness. > > > > > Consciousness > > > > > > > > > energized by Power = the UNIVERSE. Energy animated by > > > > > > > CONSCIOUSNESS > > > > > > > > > = the UNIVERSE. Love -- the desire of SHAKTI and > SHIVA > > to > > > > > > Unite -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is the essence of all Creation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That is where the term 'IN COITUS' comes in. That > note > > in > > > > the > > > > > > > > > Khadgamala was mine; the Khadgamala itself says 'on > the > > > lap > > > > > > of' -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but Shaktas are very suspicious of this term, which > is > > > > often > > > > > > > > > manipulated in mainstream Hinduism into a mini > consort > > > > > goddess > > > > > > on > > > > > > > > > the lap of a gigantic Supreme God. The actual > > historical- > > > > > > > religious > > > > > > > > > meaning of the term is much more direct: They are > > having > > > > sex. > > > > > > As > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > final verses of the Khadgamala clarify, the > > configuration > > > > is > > > > > > > Shakti > > > > > > > > > sitting atop the supine Shiva -- just as you so often > > see > > > > in > > > > > > > Shakta > > > > > > > > > (and even Shaiva) art. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The meaning is that SHAKTI is here fully animated by > > > > > > > Consciousness - > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > > > as noted elsewhere in the Stotram, She is in an > > eternal > > > > > state > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > orgasm. The human sexual impulse is merely a metaphor > > for > > > > the > > > > > > > > Cosmic > > > > > > > > > Creative Impulse that created that all we see and do > > not > > > > see. > > > > > > Her > > > > > > > > > Energy (or Power, if you will) is fully animated and > in > > a > > > > > state > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > active unfolding of Creation. The Stotram is inviting > > us > > > to > > > > > > ride > > > > > > > > > that wave with Her; in essence, to become Her. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As for the SWORD, I am aware of Eisler's "Chalice and > > the > > > > > > Blade" > > > > > > > > > analysis, and in general I find her argument to be > > > > > convincing. > > > > > > To > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > fair, however, Shaktism -- and in fact, Hinduism as a > > > > whole -- > > > > > > > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > very different, very ancient saet of interpretations > > for > > > > > SWORD > > > > > > > > > iconography. Eisler's analysis, I think, applies to > > > Persia > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > points West -- not to the very different > > > > > > iconographical/religious > > > > > > > > > histories of India, China, Japan, etc. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In Hinduism, the SWORD virtually always symbolizes > the > > > > power > > > > > > > > (Energy) > > > > > > > > > that enables us to transcend attachment, enabling > Self- > > > > > > > Realization. > > > > > > > > > The Deity holds the SWORD (be the Deity female or > male) > > > as > > > > a > > > > > > > > promise > > > > > > > > > to her or his devotee that the Deity will be the > portal > > > > > through > > > > > > > > > which this desireable goal can be achieved. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That is the Sword referred to by the Khadgamala. As > > > > Amritaji > > > > > > > wrote, > > > > > > > > > specifically describing the Khadgamala's > > > symbolism: "Khadga > > > > > > means > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > sword and mala means a garland. The Sword > > > [metaphorically] > > > > > > severs > > > > > > > > > the head, separating body from mind. It can be > > > interpreted > > > > > also > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > Wisdom -- that which separates, categorizes, and > > > > classifies. > > > > > So > > > > > > > > > it is a symbol of Knowledge. Khadgamala is about > > > imagining > > > > a > > > > > > > > garland > > > > > > > > > of synergistic ideas, nourishing and protecting them > > and > > > > > > putting > > > > > > > > > life into them." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To me, it sounds like you and he are talking about > the > > > same > > > > > > thing! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [so ... any comments, corrections or other > viewpoints? > > > I'd > > > > > > > welcome > > > > > > > > > your input. ] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Aum Maatangyai Namahe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2004 Report Share Posted June 17, 2004 I just was not sure that, if people are not drawn to the KS, that means they are "not ready yet," as has been stated. , "sunelectric101" <ouranian@l...> wrote: > Good Afternoon Mary Ann, > > My comments are in reference to the KS only. > If you have received a mantra from a Guru that is between you and > your Guru. Other Stotrams are effective in other ways. I will leave > that issue to the more advanced and learned amongst us here to > comment or not comment on. > > My focus, as far as Sadhana goes, is rather narrowed to a couple of > things. I have not been given any instruction or guidance regarding > the wide range of Stotrams, Mantras, Sadhanas & Pujas that are a part > of the Ocean of Srividya. I am content with my view from the shore at > the moment & leave them for another day. > > ~SE101 > > > > , "Mary Ann" <maryann@m...> > wrote: > > Is chanting the 108 names effective too, or only Khadga Mala > Stotram? > > What about doing seva? What about chanting mantra given by guru? > > > > , "sunelectric101" > > <ouranian@l...> wrote: > > > On the contrary I do understand your posts, Mary Ann. > > > Chant the KS and you will understand mine. : ) > > > > > > > > > ~SE101 > > > > > > > > > > > > , "Mary Ann" <maryann@m...> > > > wrote: > > > > You have read it and do not understand my posts? Hmm...not sure > e- > > > > mails or posts will matter. What did you get from the book? If > I > > > > think of anything further, I'll post. Otherwise, good luck, and > > > enjoy > > > > the Khadga Mala Stotram. > > > > > > > > MAV > > > > > > > > , "sunelectric101" > > > > <ouranian@l...> wrote: > > > > > MA > > > > > > > > > > I have read this book a couple of times. But I will re- read > it > > > to > > > > be > > > > > a good sport and I will email you as I go. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ~SE101 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , "Mary Ann" > > <maryann@m...> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > I am game to work with the Stotram if you read Chalice & > the > > > > Blade. > > > > > > The book is on the Shakti Sadhana reading list and it's > worth > > > > > reading > > > > > > if you can make it through. Some find it dense going. I > loved > > > it. > > > > > So > > > > > > far, that is my only recommendation. Thanks for asking > > > > > > > > > > > > , "sunelectric101" > > > > > > <ouranian@l...> wrote: > > > > > > > Namaste MA and Pranams, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regarding your reply below; OK I am game. > > > > > > > I will pick up the gender studies if you will pick up the > > > > > > > Stotram. What are the names of a couple of books that you > > like > > > > > > > and would reccomend? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ~SE101 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , "Mary Ann" > > > > <maryann@m...> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > I guess thousands of years without thinking and just > > acting > > > > are > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > responsible for the violence and oppression in the > world? > > > > Pick > > > > > up > > > > > > > > your gender studies book and start learning to > > incorporate > > > it > > > > > and > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > spiritual information together to bring unity and > > wholeness > > > > > > rather > > > > > > > > than compartmentalization and continued violence - > that's > > > my > > > > > > > > observation, anyway, my 2 cents. Winks at Devi and Amma. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In , "sunelectric101" > > > > > > > > <ouranian@l...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Namaste DB & Pranams, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I read your recent post regarding the Khadgamala > > Stotram. > > > A > > > > > > > couple > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > things come to mind. The real meaning and import of > > > Tantrik > > > > > > > > symbolism > > > > > > > > > can only be grasped through Sadhana and explanation > > from > > > a > > > > > > Guru. > > > > > > > No > > > > > > > > > intellectualizing, no matter how erudite, well > > footnoted > > > > and > > > > > > > backed > > > > > > > > > by scholars can ever take the place of the expereince > > > that > > > > > > comes > > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > Sadhana. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to imply that > > > Srividya > > > > is > > > > > a > > > > > > > > cult > > > > > > > > > of anti-intellectualism or a celebration of "know > > > > > nothingness" > > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > > intellectual understanding is *at best* only > auxillary > > to > > > > > > > > > *experiencing* what the symbols are pointing to. Too > > much > > > > > > > > > intellectualizing about these things without Sadhana > is > > > > > playing > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > the surfaces of Srividya. It may be entertaining and > > even > > > > > > > > > illuminating but it is still surfaces. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My 2 cents on Siva/Sakti & the Khadgamala Stotram? > > > > > > > > > Put down the book on gender studies, pick up the > > Stotram > > > > and > > > > > > > chant > > > > > > > > > daily *over a long period of time* relax and observe > > the > > > > > > changes > > > > > > > > > within and without. Pray that Devi send you someone > to > > > > > clarify > > > > > > > your > > > > > > > > > mind and best explain that which you need to know. > > (winks > > > > at > > > > > > > Kochu) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Somewhere in San Francisco having fun > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ~SE101 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "One may be like a child, a madman, a king, > > > > > > > > > independent minded, like a lord hero.... > > > > > > > > > Effulgent One, the way to be is to act > > > > > > > > > howsoever one wills, knowing both Akula and Devi's > > Kula." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (Kaula Jnana Nirnaya, XII. 3-6.) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , "Devi Bhakta" > > > > > > > > > <devi_bhakta> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > A member of the group yesterday sent me an > > interesting > > > > > > comment > > > > > > > on > > > > > > > > > > the Khadgamala Stotram: basically, she found its > core > > > > > > symbolism > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > be off-putting -- and as a result is reluctant to > try > > > it. > > > > > > Maybe > > > > > > > > > > others among you have have reacted similarly, I > don't > > > > know. > > > > > > In > > > > > > > > any > > > > > > > > > > event, I felt it was merely a misunderstanding -- > but > > I > > > > > > thought > > > > > > > > I'd > > > > > > > > > > share my response, and invite other members to > > comment: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The member told me she felt conceptually alienated > > from > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > Khadgamala Stotram because, "For me, the symbolism > of > > > the > > > > > > SWORD > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > the mention of COITUS was enough to send me away. > The > > > > SWORD > > > > > > is > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > power symbol." Specifically, she said, one denoting > > > > > > patriarchal > > > > > > > > > > domination, as argued in Eisler's "The Chalice and > > the > > > > > > Blade." > > > > > > > > The > > > > > > > > > > COITUS of Shakti and Shiva, for its part, was > > > > objectionable > > > > > > > > because > > > > > > > > > > it relied on rigidly enforced social codes and > sexual > > > > > roles. > > > > > > > She > > > > > > > > > > added an Indian correspondent had once told her > > > that "he > > > > > sees > > > > > > > > > Shakti > > > > > > > > > > as power. Hence, a sword. But I see Shakti as > energy, > > > > > > limitless > > > > > > > > > > possibilities, including for conscious peace and > > > > > prosperity - > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > a SWORD." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My reply: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree with your definition of power to a large > > > extent, > > > > > but > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > with your interpretation of the symbolism in this > > > > > particular > > > > > > > case. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Remember, the Sanskrit word 'SHAKTI' does in fact > > mean > > > > > power, > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > energy. The term 'Shakti Sadhana,' believe it or > not, > > > is > > > > > > often > > > > > > > > > > translated into English as 'The Cult of Power.' Sir > > > John > > > > > > > > > Woodroffe's > > > > > > > > > > six-volume survey of Shakta theology and practice > is > > > > > > > > entitled 'The > > > > > > > > > > World as Power.' But Woodroffe, like most > > commentators, > > > > > goes > > > > > > > out > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > his way to clarify that POWER does not imply any > kind > > > of > > > > > > > earthly > > > > > > > > > > coercive force. It simply means POWER as a > universal > > > > force - > > > > > - > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > mere > > > > > > > > > > synonym for ENERGY, really, which does in fact seem > > to > > > be > > > > a > > > > > > > much > > > > > > > > > > less loaded, much more neutral term. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So let's stick with ENERGY as the definition of > > SHAKTI. > > > > > > > However, > > > > > > > > > > let's first acknowledge that in fact POWER is the > > > default > > > > > > > > > > translation of the term by most English-speaking > > > Indians. > > > > > > Thus, > > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > > > would assume, [your correspondent's] use of the > term > > > was > > > > > > quite > > > > > > > > > > innocent. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Whether you call it POWER or ENERGY, the meaning > > > conveyed > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > > > indeed encompass yours: 'energy, limitless > > > possibilities, > > > > > > > > including > > > > > > > > > > for conscious peace and prosperity.' It is *all* > > > Energy, > > > > > > > whether > > > > > > > > > > perceived (from our perspective) as positive or > > > negative > > > > in > > > > > > > > effect. > > > > > > > > > > Einstein said all matter is energy. Shaktism says > > > > > everything > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > is, is energy -- that it constitutes the three > > worlds, > > > > and > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > is all DEVI. SHIVA is the term for Consciousness. > > > > > > Consciousness > > > > > > > > > > energized by Power = the UNIVERSE. Energy animated > by > > > > > > > > CONSCIOUSNESS > > > > > > > > > > = the UNIVERSE. Love -- the desire of SHAKTI and > > SHIVA > > > to > > > > > > > Unite -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is the essence of all Creation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That is where the term 'IN COITUS' comes in. That > > note > > > in > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > Khadgamala was mine; the Khadgamala itself says 'on > > the > > > > lap > > > > > > > of' -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but Shaktas are very suspicious of this term, which > > is > > > > > often > > > > > > > > > > manipulated in mainstream Hinduism into a mini > > consort > > > > > > goddess > > > > > > > on > > > > > > > > > > the lap of a gigantic Supreme God. The actual > > > historical- > > > > > > > > religious > > > > > > > > > > meaning of the term is much more direct: They are > > > having > > > > > sex. > > > > > > > As > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > final verses of the Khadgamala clarify, the > > > configuration > > > > > is > > > > > > > > Shakti > > > > > > > > > > sitting atop the supine Shiva -- just as you so > often > > > see > > > > > in > > > > > > > > Shakta > > > > > > > > > > (and even Shaiva) art. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The meaning is that SHAKTI is here fully animated > by > > > > > > > > Consciousness - > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > > > > as noted elsewhere in the Stotram, She is in an > > > eternal > > > > > > state > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > orgasm. The human sexual impulse is merely a > metaphor > > > for > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > Cosmic > > > > > > > > > > Creative Impulse that created that all we see and > do > > > not > > > > > see. > > > > > > > Her > > > > > > > > > > Energy (or Power, if you will) is fully animated > and > > in > > > a > > > > > > state > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > active unfolding of Creation. The Stotram is > inviting > > > us > > > > to > > > > > > > ride > > > > > > > > > > that wave with Her; in essence, to become Her. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As for the SWORD, I am aware of Eisler's "Chalice > and > > > the > > > > > > > Blade" > > > > > > > > > > analysis, and in general I find her argument to be > > > > > > convincing. > > > > > > > To > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > fair, however, Shaktism -- and in fact, Hinduism as > a > > > > > whole -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > very different, very ancient saet of > interpretations > > > for > > > > > > SWORD > > > > > > > > > > iconography. Eisler's analysis, I think, applies to > > > > Persia > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > points West -- not to the very different > > > > > > > iconographical/religious > > > > > > > > > > histories of India, China, Japan, etc. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In Hinduism, the SWORD virtually always symbolizes > > the > > > > > power > > > > > > > > > (Energy) > > > > > > > > > > that enables us to transcend attachment, enabling > > Self- > > > > > > > > Realization. > > > > > > > > > > The Deity holds the SWORD (be the Deity female or > > male) > > > > as > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > promise > > > > > > > > > > to her or his devotee that the Deity will be the > > portal > > > > > > through > > > > > > > > > > which this desireable goal can be achieved. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That is the Sword referred to by the Khadgamala. As > > > > > Amritaji > > > > > > > > wrote, > > > > > > > > > > specifically describing the Khadgamala's > > > > symbolism: "Khadga > > > > > > > means > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > sword and mala means a garland. The Sword > > > > [metaphorically] > > > > > > > severs > > > > > > > > > > the head, separating body from mind. It can be > > > > interpreted > > > > > > also > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > Wisdom -- that which separates, categorizes, and > > > > > classifies. > > > > > > So > > > > > > > > > > it is a symbol of Knowledge. Khadgamala is about > > > > imagining > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > garland > > > > > > > > > > of synergistic ideas, nourishing and protecting > them > > > and > > > > > > > putting > > > > > > > > > > life into them." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To me, it sounds like you and he are talking about > > the > > > > same > > > > > > > thing! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [so ... any comments, corrections or other > > viewpoints? > > > > I'd > > > > > > > > welcome > > > > > > > > > > your input. ] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Aum Maatangyai Namahe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2004 Report Share Posted June 17, 2004 Dear Mary Ann: Any level of sadhana is effective at its own level. Any sadhana is a million times than no sadhana. Simple praying is effective in general, especially if done on a regular basis. Countless masses of people will attest to this. Mantra japa is powerful, and mantra japa with guru diksha even more so. Chanting Her names is very purifying, and can transform your world in time. Seva is high sadhana indeed; it is the way we achieve the state in which our every thought and movement is an act of worship. The Khadgamala, however, is a gateway to an entirely different level. It is, to use modern parlance, a "power tool." It is a mystical formula for kicking your sadhana into overdrive; like switching from typewriter to word processor. I am sorry to bring these rather crude metaphors into a refined conversation -- but those who take the time to learn the Khadgamala will very quickly understand what this means. And I think that is what SE101 is trying to convey. Does the Khadgamala render all other tools obsolete? Of course not; that is absurd. Even a carpenter with the very best power tools still uses handtools all the time, as the job requires. But with power tools, you can often do the job with more efficiency, speed and precision. So that, for instance, you spend less time building your home and more time living in it. My feeling, again, is this: The Khadgamala Stotram is an extraordinarily powerful and versatile power tool. As with any power tool, some will look and say, "Ugh, it's too complicated. Forget it." Others, though, will take the time to read the instructions, learn the technique -- and pretty soon (as with cordless drills and word processors) they'll be saying, "How did I ever live without it?" That's why we're going through the headache of getting the Khadgamala "out there" as a special gift of love to every member. No one's forcing anyone to open the gift. But if they do, it might really change their lives. That's all. Aum Maatangyai Namahe , "Mary Ann" <maryann@m...> wrote: > Is chanting the 108 names effective too, or only Khadga Mala Stotram? > What about doing seva? What about chanting mantra given by guru? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2004 Report Share Posted June 17, 2004 <<<<The Khadgamala, however, is a gateway to an entirely different level. It is, to use modern parlance, a "power tool." It is a mystical formula for kicking your sadhana into overdrive; like switching from typewriter to word processor. I am sorry to bring these rather crude metaphors into a refined conversation -- but those who take the time to learn the Khadgamala will very quickly understand what this means. And I think that is what SE101 is trying to convey.>>>>> <<SE101>> That is exactly what I am trying to say. And overdrive is not an out of place description of the feeling either. It *does* take an investment of effort and at times struggle. Especially if Sanskrit doesn't just roll off your tongue. So you can't dispair if it doesn't feel natural at first. It will probably feel more like flipping thorough pages and stuttering in baby speak than reverently worshiping the Divine Mother. That too changes with practice. It isn't instantaneous (unless you are really lucky). But good things in life rarely are. One thing that is guranteed; if you do not chant it you will not understand its effects. Nor will *feel* or intuit the inner logic of the practice. I too wondered why this particular Dhyanam, why the references to Devi as the Ruler of Desire (Khamesvari), Siva/Sakti in coitus etc. Why this, why that, why everything????? This formed the basis of more than a few long discussions with several people on this group and elsewhere. Then I asked the best why of all. Why not seek instruction in chanting it and see for myself. ~SE101 , "Devi Bhakta" <devi_bhakta> wrote: > Dear Mary Ann: > > Any level of sadhana is effective at its own level. Any sadhana is a > million times than no sadhana. > > Simple praying is effective in general, especially if done on a > regular basis. Countless masses of people will attest to this. > Mantra japa is powerful, and mantra japa with guru diksha even more > so. Chanting Her names is very purifying, and can transform your > world in time. Seva is high sadhana indeed; it is the way we achieve > the state in which our every thought and movement is an act of > worship. > > The Khadgamala, however, is a gateway to an entirely different > level. It is, to use modern parlance, a "power tool." It is a > mystical formula for kicking your sadhana into overdrive; like > switching from typewriter to word processor. I am sorry to bring > these rather crude metaphors into a refined conversation -- but > those who take the time to learn the Khadgamala will very quickly > understand what this means. And I think that is what SE101 is trying > to convey. > > Does the Khadgamala render all other tools obsolete? Of course not; > that is absurd. Even a carpenter with the very best power tools > still uses handtools all the time, as the job requires. But with > power tools, you can often do the job with more efficiency, speed > and precision. So that, for instance, you spend less time building > your home and more time living in it. > > My feeling, again, is this: The Khadgamala Stotram is an > extraordinarily powerful and versatile power tool. As with any power > tool, some will look and say, "Ugh, it's too complicated. Forget > it." Others, though, will take the time to read the instructions, > learn the technique -- and pretty soon (as with cordless drills and > word processors) they'll be saying, "How did I ever live without it?" > > That's why we're going through the headache of getting the > Khadgamala "out there" as a special gift of love to every member. No > one's forcing anyone to open the gift. But if they do, it might > really change their lives. > > That's all. > > Aum Maatangyai Namahe > > > , "Mary Ann" <maryann@m...> > wrote: > > Is chanting the 108 names effective too, or only Khadga Mala > Stotram? > > What about doing seva? What about chanting mantra given by guru? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2004 Report Share Posted June 17, 2004 I thank you both for sharing about this. I did not know why the KS was chosen as the project to bring to Shakti Sadhana's members. I am happy to read that all who worked to bring this "power tool" to the group members feel so strongly about its value. , "sunelectric101" <ouranian@l...> wrote: > <<<<The Khadgamala, however, is a gateway to an entirely different > level. It is, to use modern parlance, a "power tool." It is a > mystical formula for kicking your sadhana into overdrive; like > switching from typewriter to word processor. I am sorry to bring > these rather crude metaphors into a refined conversation -- but > those who take the time to learn the Khadgamala will very quickly > understand what this means. And I think that is what SE101 is trying > to convey.>>>>> > > <<SE101>> That is exactly what I am trying to say. And overdrive is > not an out of place description of the feeling either. It *does* take > an investment of effort and at times struggle. Especially if Sanskrit > doesn't just roll off your tongue. So you can't dispair if it doesn't > feel natural at first. It will probably feel more like flipping > thorough pages and stuttering in baby speak than reverently > worshiping the Divine Mother. That too changes with practice. > > It isn't instantaneous (unless you are really lucky). But good things > in life rarely are. One thing that is guranteed; if you do not chant > it you will not understand its effects. Nor will *feel* or intuit the > inner logic of the practice. > > I too wondered why this particular Dhyanam, why the references to > Devi as the Ruler of Desire (Khamesvari), Siva/Sakti in coitus etc. > Why this, why that, why everything????? This formed the basis of more > than a few long discussions with several people on this group and > elsewhere. Then I asked the best why of all. Why not seek instruction > in chanting it and see for myself. > > > ~SE101 > , "Devi Bhakta" > <devi_bhakta> wrote: > > Dear Mary Ann: > > > > Any level of sadhana is effective at its own level. Any sadhana is > a > > million times than no sadhana. > > > > Simple praying is effective in general, especially if done on a > > regular basis. Countless masses of people will attest to this. > > Mantra japa is powerful, and mantra japa with guru diksha even more > > so. Chanting Her names is very purifying, and can transform your > > world in time. Seva is high sadhana indeed; it is the way we > achieve > > the state in which our every thought and movement is an act of > > worship. > > > > The Khadgamala, however, is a gateway to an entirely different > > level. It is, to use modern parlance, a "power tool." It is a > > mystical formula for kicking your sadhana into overdrive; like > > switching from typewriter to word processor. I am sorry to bring > > these rather crude metaphors into a refined conversation -- but > > those who take the time to learn the Khadgamala will very quickly > > understand what this means. And I think that is what SE101 is > trying > > to convey. > > > > Does the Khadgamala render all other tools obsolete? Of course not; > > that is absurd. Even a carpenter with the very best power tools > > still uses handtools all the time, as the job requires. But with > > power tools, you can often do the job with more efficiency, speed > > and precision. So that, for instance, you spend less time building > > your home and more time living in it. > > > > My feeling, again, is this: The Khadgamala Stotram is an > > extraordinarily powerful and versatile power tool. As with any > power > > tool, some will look and say, "Ugh, it's too complicated. Forget > > it." Others, though, will take the time to read the instructions, > > learn the technique -- and pretty soon (as with cordless drills and > > word processors) they'll be saying, "How did I ever live without > it?" > > > > That's why we're going through the headache of getting the > > Khadgamala "out there" as a special gift of love to every member. > No > > one's forcing anyone to open the gift. But if they do, it might > > really change their lives. > > > > That's all. > > > > Aum Maatangyai Namahe > > > > > > , "Mary Ann" <maryann@m...> > > wrote: > > > Is chanting the 108 names effective too, or only Khadga Mala > > Stotram? > > > What about doing seva? What about chanting mantra given by guru? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2004 Report Share Posted June 17, 2004 , "Mary Ann" <maryann@m...> wrote: > Is chanting the 108 names effective too, or only Khadga Mala Stotram? > What about doing seva? What about chanting mantra given by guru? If one is given any mantra by a Guru, in general it becomes a Nitya Karma(things to be done daily without fail), unless the Guru who gave the mantra specifically instructed you to chant it only on specific days. Everything else comes later. In your case, your mantra japa(minimum 108/day incase the initiating teacher doesnt specify any number) should be first thing you do after morning shower and then anything else you want to recite, should be done after that. That is how it is supposed to be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2004 Report Share Posted June 17, 2004 I too wondered why this particular Dhyanam, why the references to Devi as the Ruler of Desire (Khamesvari), Siva/Sakti in coitus etc. Why this, why that, why everything????? This formed the basis of more than a few long discussions with several people on this group and elsewhere. Then I asked the best why of all. Why not seek instruction in chanting it and see for myself. -------The deities are in union. In nature there is union in balance of opposites. In consciousness when one is non-dual aware then one is in union. In Christian Apocryphia Christ speaks of union between his disciples and himself as being wed. Tibetan Budhism deities are all in Yabyum or father/mother union. Even for the undevout union is as close to impersonalism as they can find. The mountain is mirrored in the waters of the valley, Kailas in Manasarovar. The father and mother cannot be distinguished in the Dao. All things have opposites. Why would not the supreme deities of Sri Chakra be in union? There is no possible reason why not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2004 Report Share Posted June 17, 2004 detective_mongo_phd wrote:I too wondered why this particular Dhyanam, why the references to Devi as the Ruler of Desire (Khamesvari), Siva/Sakti in coitus etc. Why this, why that, why everything????? This formed the basis of more than a few long discussions with several people on this group and elsewhere. Then I asked the best why of all. Why not seek instruction in chanting it and see for myself. Okay this shall be my last for this moment. To me everything starts with why? what? and when? Sometimes its good to ask the why's, the what's and the when's. That is how a child begin to learn. And as parent, it is important to explain and to guide this "child" to make the learning process an enjoyable and meaningful one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 20, 2004 Report Share Posted June 20, 2004 Dear DB, Thank you for sharing KS and manks thanks to the 2 shaktha mahans who was sharing them with us ............. May I know which scripture was KS taken from ? Would Sri Vidya Upasana get the same privilage of discussion as KS have been done here in the future ? Jai Maa!! Devi Bhakta <devi_bhakta wrote: Dear Mary Ann: Any level of sadhana is effective at its own level. Any sadhana is a million times than no sadhana. Simple praying is effective in general, especially if done on a regular basis. Countless masses of people will attest to this. Mantra japa is powerful, and mantra japa with guru diksha even more so. Chanting Her names is very purifying, and can transform your world in time. Seva is high sadhana indeed; it is the way we achieve the state in which our every thought and movement is an act of worship. The Khadgamala, however, is a gateway to an entirely different level. It is, to use modern parlance, a "power tool." It is a mystical formula for kicking your sadhana into overdrive; like switching from typewriter to word processor. I am sorry to bring these rather crude metaphors into a refined conversation -- but those who take the time to learn the Khadgamala will very quickly understand what this means. And I think that is what SE101 is trying to convey. Does the Khadgamala render all other tools obsolete? Of course not; that is absurd. Even a carpenter with the very best power tools still uses handtools all the time, as the job requires. But with power tools, you can often do the job with more efficiency, speed and precision. So that, for instance, you spend less time building your home and more time living in it. My feeling, again, is this: The Khadgamala Stotram is an extraordinarily powerful and versatile power tool. As with any power tool, some will look and say, "Ugh, it's too complicated. Forget it." Others, though, will take the time to read the instructions, learn the technique -- and pretty soon (as with cordless drills and word processors) they'll be saying, "How did I ever live without it?" That's why we're going through the headache of getting the Khadgamala "out there" as a special gift of love to every member. No one's forcing anyone to open the gift. But if they do, it might really change their lives. That's all. Aum Maatangyai Namahe , "Mary Ann" <maryann@m...> wrote: > Is chanting the 108 names effective too, or only Khadga Mala Stotram? > What about doing seva? What about chanting mantra given by guru? / Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 20, 2004 Report Share Posted June 20, 2004 Thank you Kanna_krishnan, Welcome back. How's the Indian Trip? For a start perhaps we can refer to the Saundaryalahari verse 11 which gives description of the Sri Cakra. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 21, 2004 Report Share Posted June 21, 2004 Namste Noraji, It was good .Manage to obtain few more scriptures for further studies..................... Thank you Noraji for the reference for Sri Chakra . However I was looking for scriptural reference for Khadgamala Stotram. I think it is an excellent work revealed by Divine to 2 shaktha mahans(I hope you dont mind me addresing them such) but I was wondering if it is stated in the shastric work or was it for the first time revealed to this great gurus............... I do not consider Adi Shankarcharya work as scriptural work rather it is a glossary study on the main scripture itself. For example the Mahishashumardini stotra is a summary study of Devi Mahatmaya .Lingasatakam is preview on Linga purana and so forth.There is no reference in any other shastra on Adi Sankaracharya work but Adi Shanakaracharya have refered to shastras to support his work . The same I hold for Ramanuja . Vallabhacharya etc etc. This is only my prefrence I hope others do not end up arguing on this too...................... My compliments on arranging the talk at Lakshmi Narayan Temple Virendraji must be very happy. You have done a great service ---------once again !!!! By the way is can you share what has one to do to learn Sri Vidya upasana since you know Guru Amritanandaji to certain extent.Ever thought of bringing the Mahan to Malysia as well . Just once at least ........................ Jai Maa!! "N. Madasamy" <ashwini_puralasamy wrote: Thank you Kanna_krishnan, Welcome back. How's the Indian Trip? For a start perhaps we can refer to the Saundaryalahari verse 11 which gives description of the Sri Cakra. / ji New and Improved Mail - Send 10MB messages! 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.