The khagamala devis' pictures.

[Guest guest]

The khagamala devis' pictures dont really match the descriptions

given in the actual tantras, do they?

They are not aesthetically correct either(they dont follow the

Indian rules of sculptural depiction).

[Guest guest]

as far as I know they are as they appeared to amritanandasaraswati.

 

Do we follow aesthetic depiction when we are taking a photograph? i do not think

that's possible.

 

As for discriptions in Tantras we have just dhyanas and as far as i know all the

elements of dhyanas are present in them.

 

jaimaa1008 <jaimaa1008 wrote:

The khagamala devis' pictures dont really match the descriptions given in the

actual tantras, do they? They are not aesthetically correct either(they dont

follow the

Indian rules of sculptural depiction).

 

 

 

 

 

Sponsor

Will you help a needy child?

·It only costs .60¢ a day · It's easier than you think.·Click here to meet a

waiting child you can sponsor now.

 

/

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

The dhyana shlokas depict them different and since you guys are

explaining the Khadgamala... I think you should mention that the

pictures are not necessarily as described in the tantras or paddhatis.

For example the devis of the second avarana(the current pictures)are

described as follows.

The yogini hridaya says:.. paashankushadharaa hyetaa

raktaa raktaabaranavritaa...

srividyarnava:- ...raktavarnaaH sravadpiyushavigrahaaH

paashankushadhara..

 

 

 

 

 

, sankara menon <kochu1tz>

wrote:

>

> As for discriptions in Tantras we have just dhyanas and as far as i

know all the elements of dhyanas are present in them.

[Guest guest]

Dear Jai Maa 1008:

 

You wrote: *** The dhyana shlokas depict them different and since you

guys are explaining the Khadgamala... I think you should mention that

the pictures are not necessarily as described in the tantras or

paddhatis. ***

 

The dhyana slokas depict the visions of sages past. The images at

Devipuram depict the visions of a sage who walks among us in the

present. One is not less valid than the other. This was clarified

earlier with significant discussion on this board. As Kochu explained,

"They are as they appeared to Amritananda Saraswati. Do we follow

aesthetic depiction when we are taking a photograph?"

 

Kochu is correct. Amritananada further explains: "The power [in

Khadgamala recitation] comes from intensifying concentration to

visualize the form, hear the sound, feel the touch, taste, and smell

of the divine perfume of the goddess manifesting that part of the

ever-youthful Goddess. You can sit in front of each of the sculptures

in Devipuram to get training into such visualizations."

 

You added: *** For example the devis of the second avarana(the current

pictures)are described as follows. The yogini hridaya says:..

paashankushadharaa hyetaa raktaa raktaabaranavritaa... srividyarnava:-

....raktavarnaaH sravadpiyushavigrahaaH paashankushadhara.. ***

 

Again, these are the visions of sages past. Amrita's are the visions

of a sage in the present. Choose whichever you wish. But choose. And

practice. You may have heard a wise old saying, that "The letter of

the Word kills; the Spirit of the Word gives Life."

 

Aum MAtangyai NamaH

[Guest guest]

Thank you Devi Bhakta.

The earlier discussion about the pictures were about the content,

about them being *naked* goddessess but I was talking about *form*.

 

About choosing the visions, since this is aforum for beginners

and I am one too, I think it is essential that we work with what has

survived the the ravages of time and all kinds of change. If we have

to choose the modern, just because its *new* then I would not need a

khadgamala stotra in sanskrit, i could just write my own free form

poetry and work with it. One has to know the rules to break them and

be free. The freedom comes from years of following form.

 

I am not denying the importance of Gurujis visions( for him), all

I am saying is that if we are learning/teaching something traditional

we have to do it as it is or we can do something new, like write

poens about my visions but then it would not be Khadgamala but my

vision of the devis which might not be of much use to others.if

everyone could have a vision of a yantra it would definitely be a

yantra but not a sriyantra.

 

There is too much watering down of tantra as it and I sure would

not like a non recognizable mush oozing sweetness.

[Guest guest]

Dear Jai Maa 1008:

 

Thanks for your clarifications. You write:

 

*** The earlier discussion about the pictures were about the content,

about them being *naked* goddessess but I was talking about *form*.

***

 

The conversations I was referring to discussed the source of the

forms, being Amritaji's firsthand experience.

 

*** About choosing the visions, since this is a forum for beginners

and I am one too, I think it is essential that we work with what has

survived the the ravages of time and all kinds of change. ***

 

I am in complete agreement. What distinguishes Shaktism is its

breathtaking longevity and continuity, stretching back into the dim

mists of prehistory, and enriched by each subsequent generation of

sages.

 

The various recovered/reconstructed Wiccan and Pagan systems are

generally just a few decades old at most: Though they try valiantly

to expand upon ancient sources and lost traditions, centuries of

Jewish/Christian/Muslim dominance and systematic persecution of Old

Religion practitioners has broken their essential link and continuity

with the past. Despite their ancient inspiration, today's Pagan and

Wiccan religions are, for all practical purposes, very recent and

modern concoctions.

 

The core of Shaktism predates the Vedas, though it has assimilated

them, adopted Sanskrit as a litergical language, etc. Its very life

is its continuity -- the never-extinguished flame handed from guru to

shishya since time immemorial. There is no reconstruction from

ancient fragments. From Paleolithic times to the present, Shaktism

has remained ever whole, even as successive generations of teachers

have deepened and enriched it.

 

Thus Shaktism is, by its very nature, both inconceiveably ancient and

absolutely, up-to-the-moment modern. That is its strength, its

beauty, and the secret of its survival as a coherent system.

 

You note: *** If we have to choose the modern, just because its

*new* then I would not need a khadgamala stotra in sanskrit, i could

just write my own free form poetry and work with it. One has to know

the rules to break them and be free. The freedom comes from years of

following form. ***

 

See my comments above. In Shaktism, we do not *choose* "modern"

or "traditional" -- the two are inextricably intertwined. We choose

Life, which is always a present-day iceberg's tip, anchored by the

huge, accumulated weight and wisdom of millennia.

 

You *can* "write free-form poetry and work with it" -- IF you are

writing from experience; and not theory or conjecture.

 

Following form *can* lead to "freedom," as you say. But it is not the

mere act of following form that brings you freedom -- it is the

experiential realization of the Divine.

 

*** I am not denying the importance of Gurujis visions (for him) ***

 

I assume that your parenthetical "for him" means that you *do* deny

the importance of Guruji's visions "for others."

 

That simply means that you do not accept his teachings; which is

fine -- "for you." But make no mistake: They are every bit as valid

as the scriptural references you cite. Just because a concept is old

does not mean it is more valid than a more recent development or

refinement of that concept. And just because something is recent does

not mean that it breaks with tradition.

 

Guruji is not "writing free-form poetry and working with it." He is

more akin to an explorer bringing us news of worlds unseen and

unimagined by most, but as real as our own. In other words, he is

doing what gurus have done from time immemorial. He is showing what

he has seen and trying to help us see it too. Just like the sage who

wrote the scriptures that you prefer for your personal practice.

 

You continue: "i could write poems about my visions but then it would

not be Khadgamala but my vision of the devis which might not be of

much use to others."

 

Right. But you are not Guruji. As you stated yourself above, you are

a "beginner." So why are you wasting your time trying to argue down

experience? You would do better to listen to what Guruji is saying,

rather than judging and/or dismissing his experience and teaching

based on some books you've read. Or choose your books, but understand

that they are an additional valid vision, not the *only* valid vision.

 

*** if everyone could have a vision of a yantra it would definitely

be a yantra but not a sriyantra. ***

 

This, again, points to the essential flaw in your entire argument.

Amrita is not "everyone" -- he is a Guru, and he knows of what he

speaks. Do you?

 

Aum MAtangyai NamaH

[Guest guest]

Namaskaram DeviBhakta garu,

 

I read a few of your posts on Khadgamala series. I tried

to look up all the posts so that I could read them all in

continuation, but when I go to the group posts I am unable

to search for a particular subject.

 

So I was wondering if you could give me a pointer to

access all the posts.

 

Also, I got the recitation of Kadgamala stotram by Guruji

Sri Amritanandanatha from the vi1.org site. But the text

that is referenced there is not the same as the

recitation. So I was wondering if you had a copy of the

stotram as it is recited by Guruji.

 

thank you and regards,

nalini.

 

 

On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 22:24:40 -0000

"Devi Bhakta" <devi_bhakta wrote:

>

>

>Dear Jai Maa 1008:

>

>You wrote: *** The dhyana shlokas depict them different

>and since you

>guys are explaining the Khadgamala... I think you should

>mention that

>the pictures are not necessarily as described in the

>tantras or

>paddhatis. ***

>

>The dhyana slokas depict the visions of sages past. The

>images at

>Devipuram depict the visions of a sage who walks among us

>in the

>present. One is not less valid than the other. This was

>clarified

>earlier with significant discussion on this board. As

>Kochu explained,

>"They are as they appeared to Amritananda Saraswati. Do

>we follow

>aesthetic depiction when we are taking a photograph?"

>

>Kochu is correct. Amritananada further explains: "The

>power [in

>Khadgamala recitation] comes from intensifying

>concentration to

>visualize the form, hear the sound, feel the touch,

>taste, and smell

>of the divine perfume of the goddess manifesting that

>part of the

>ever-youthful Goddess. You can sit in front of each of

>the sculptures

>in Devipuram to get training into such visualizations."

>

>You added: *** For example the devis of the second

>avarana(the current

>pictures)are described as follows. The yogini hridaya

>says:..

>paashankushadharaa hyetaa raktaa raktaabaranavritaa...

>srividyarnava:-

>...raktavarnaaH sravadpiyushavigrahaaH

>paashankushadhara.. ***

>

>Again, these are the visions of sages past. Amrita's are

>the visions

>of a sage in the present. Choose whichever you wish. But

>choose. And

>practice. You may have heard a wise old saying, that "The

>letter of

>the Word kills; the Spirit of the Word gives Life."

>

>Aum MAtangyai NamaH

>

>

>

>

>

>------------------------ Sponsor

>

>

> Links

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Devi Bhakta,

 

You wrote:

>

But you are not Guruji. As you stated yourself above, you are

a "beginner." So why are you wasting your time trying to argue down

experience? You would do better to listen to what Guruji is saying,

rather than judging and/or dismissing his experience and teaching

based on some books you've read. Or choose your books, but understand

that they are an additional valid vision, not the *only* valid vision.

>

I am not judging or dismissing his experience and teaching, nor

am i saying that there is just one valid vision.I started by saying

that the pics. were not aesthetic, and I meant thir execution was not

of great merit as art, and then when Kochu said what aesthetic can a

photo have( it does and thats why photography is an art form)i added

that the descriptions in the texts are different.

Since the Khadgamala is a well known *ancient* text I thought the

descriptions should be textual. Going by your own argument you can

choose to visualize as per those pictures but every one need not.I

was just stating the fact that they were different.

Every body has a right to their opinion. I remember when I

posted a question about the presence of sexual fluids in

Vishesharghya

and Kochu and Sunelectric reacted strongly to it and now Kochu

defends the alchohol in visheshargya and quoting texts.(the same

texts also mention the other ingredient.)

If this forum is used to enforce the opinions of a few people you

should say so and not make it seem like its a fair discussion of

Shakti sadhana. No one has a clue to the one right path, we can only

make one our own.I would rather have my truth however flawed it is

than someone else's forced on me, however great the other is - thats

religion for me.

Thank you for taking the trouble to reply.

[Guest guest]

Dear Jai Maa 1008:

 

Thank you for your consideration of my reply. I understand your

position that you prefer some of the older textual dhyanas to

Amritaji's more recent dhyanas.

 

*** Since the Khadgamala is a well known *ancient* text I thought the

descriptions should be textual. ***

 

As I noted in my previous post, this is of course an entirely valid

approach.

 

*** Going by your own argument you can choose to visualize as per

those pictures but every one need not. ****

 

Yes, this is precisely my position.

 

*** I was just stating the fact that they were different. ***

 

I apparently misunderstood. When you mentioned that Guruji's dhyanas

are valid only "for him", and no different than any "free-form poetry"

dreamed up by any person, I read your words to imply that Guruji's

dhyanas were invalid for use by others, and by extension that he was

not a true rishi of these forms. That would be incorrect.

 

If you were merely stating that "they are different," then your point

is noted and appreciated, and I apologize for my misunderstanding.

 

*** Everybody has a right to their opinion. ***

 

I agree, of course.

 

*** If this forum is used to enforce the opinions of a few people you

should say so and not make it seem like its a fair discussion of

Shakti sadhana. ***

 

If you honestly believe that this group "is used to enforce the

opinions of a few people," I don't think you've been paying attention!

*lol* I can barely keep up with the diversity of opinion flying back

and forth here.

 

And look: Your opinions are here, in full. None have been deleted or

censored in any way. If you chose to post a textual dhyana for each of

the Khadgamala devis, I would in fact welcome it. As I have stated in

most of my Khadgamala posts, I am barely scratching the surface. Much

more could be written on each of these devis. Discussion and debate

from other members bring the series to life.

 

*** I remember when I posted a question about the presence of sexual

fluids in Vishesharghya and Kochu and Sunelectric reacted strongly to

it and now Kochu defends the alchohol in visheshargya and quoting

texts. ***

 

What can I say? I can guarantee that your opinion is welcome here; but

I cannot guarantee that everyone will agree with you, or that no one

will argue with you. That is the essence of debate.

 

Take for example my last post, which disagreed with some of your

observations and conclusion about Khadgamala tradition and the

validity of Guruji's contribution to that tradition. I am sure that

some people agreed with you and thought I was full of horse manure;

and I am sure that others agreed with me.

 

As long as there is debate, there is no "enforcing of opinions." But

that doesn't mean there is no disagreement!

 

*** No one has a clue to the one right path, we can only make one our

own. ***

 

I'd argue there is no "one right path." eko satya vipraH bahdhaa

vadanti -- the Truth is One; the wise call it by many names. If we

have a guru, s/he will help us find the path best suited to our

individual needs. Amrita took me as shishya; he is my Guru; therefore

I do not question the rightness of his dhyanas. I follow his advice

and trust in the result. That is my path.

 

You are free to think (and say) that this path is wrong or foolish or

incorrect -- and you did, uncensored: In your kind words, Amritaji's

dhyanas are a "watering down of tantra" and a "non-recognizable mush

oozing sweetness," and the Devipuram murtis are "not of great merit as

art."

 

That is your opinion. You shared it freely, and may continue to do so

as much and as often as you please. But you cannot expect that I will

wholeheartedly agree with you.

 

*** I would rather have my truth however flawed it is than someone

else's forced on me, however great the other is - thats religion for

me. ***

 

Me too.

 

Aum MAtangyai NamaH

[Guest guest]

Namaskaram Nalini:

 

Thank you for your inquiries on the Khadgamala Devis Series.

 

You ask: *** I was wondering if you could give me a pointer to access

all the posts. ***

 

Sure. Click on the photo of the featured devi on the front page of the

Shakti Sadhana Group's front page. There you will find a page of

Khadgamala resources. Click on "Archives." We are gradually archiving

on Khadgamala posts there, but it is not yet completely up to date.

 

In the alternative, you could click "Messages" in the menu at left,

and then type "Khadgamala Devis Series" in the "Search" box. Keep

clicking "Previous" and you'll eventually find all of the posts from

this series.

 

*** Also, I got the recitation of Kadgamala stotram by Guruji Sri

Amritanandanatha from the vi1.org site. But the text that is

referenced there is not the same as the recitation. So I was wondering

if you had a copy of the stotram as it is recited by Guruji. ***

 

Yes, we do. Same deal: Click on the devi photo to get to the

Khadgamala resource page. Then click on "Document" and you will find a

complete text in Sanskrit, Roman transliteration and English

translation that follows Guruji's recitation exactly.

 

Good luck, and please do not hesitate to let us know if you encounter

any further difficulties.

 

DB