Time for Vichara [What is DEVI ]

[Guest guest]

Pradeep wrote [1]"I read through lalitopakhyana quickly"

 

Perhaps you should spend more time and read the lalithopakhyana

thoroughly and try to understand the esoteric meanings, and then

followed by the Lalitha Sahasranama. More about Lalithopakhyana is

in our homepage together with the Lalitha Sahasranama commentary.

 

[2] I have the following question. 1) Is manmatha dead or alive ? (I

mean at present, I assume all people reading are in the same

universe and in same time)"

 

What do you think? Based from your understanding, during that

quickie reading session, Is manmatha dead?

 

"[3] The Homas etc seems to be rather costly to perform since they

need waters from five oceans etc"

 

In many of Krisha story, one it is said that he made love to all the

Gopi girls. Do you think he did that?

 

"[4] So I would assume only a minute version of these yagas can be

performed, otherwise one has to resort to internal yagas (Samaya

?)"

 

What do you think?

 

To me learning should be fun. It should be self discovery and an

adventure, only then the learning process will be meaningful.

 

 

"[5]Help!!"

 

Just as a man sinking in the ocean suddenly finds a boat to

rescue him, so also your virtuous actions of the past have now

placed you on the most sacred heights of Self-Realization. That DEVI

Tripura, who is the conscious core of the heart and therefore knows

each one intimately, swiftly rescues Her unswering devotees from the

jaws of death, after manifesting Herself in their hearts.

Investigation is the Sun for chasting away the dense darkness of

indolence. It is generated by the worship of God with devotion. When

the Supreme Devi is well pleased with the worship of the devotee.

She turn into vichara in him and shines as the blasing sun in the

expense of his Heart. Therefore O Rama, the mahatmaya was first

revealed to you, having heard it, you have now progressed well.

Vichara is the only way to attain the highest Good. If once Vichara

takes root,the highest good has for all practical purposes, been

reached in this life '{Tripura Rahasya : The secret of the Supreme

Goddess ]

[Guest guest]

, "NMadasamy" <nmadasamy@s...> wrote:

>

My belief is subtle is more free than the gross. This applies to

practices which uses the subtler aspects of body, mind as opposed to

practices which uses the gross.

 

Even in Lalitopakhyana this is evident. Bhandasura if i remember

accomplishes his process of de-kamifying universe by assuming form of air.

 

Gender for me is a construct in the gross body. So too much talk about

the supreme was female and lingam coming out of yonis etc is again

dabbling in grosser aspects of being. And to top it off you started

quoting examples from archaelogy and images of lajja gauri which is

even more in the gross realm. All this led me to make the statement

that "You understand ShaktiSadhana from a gross level".

 

>

> [2] I have the following question. 1) Is manmatha dead or alive ? (I

> mean at present, I assume all people reading are in the same

> universe and in same time)"

>

> What do you think? Based from your understanding, during that

> quickie reading session, Is manmatha dead?

 

I am asking the present situation, all this happens in cycle. So is

manmatha dead or alive now, i dont know.

>

> "[3] The Homas etc seems to be rather costly to perform since they

> need waters from five oceans etc"

>

> In many of Krisha story, one it is said that he made love to all the

> Gopi girls. Do you think he did that?

 

May be, there may be Yogic sidhis which allow one to do that?.

Or atleast using techniques in mental field several gopis could be

infatuated to a single person. It is possible.

[Guest guest]

Actually, gender is a function of duality, thus it is

found everywhere duality exists. When one goes beyond

duality, then "gender" is no longer an issue. It is

said we are all female in relation to the ,which

penetrates all things.

Lilith M.

--- pradeep kumar <palakkad_pdeep wrote:

>

>

> , "NMadasamy"

> <nmadasamy@s...> wrote:

> >

> My belief is subtle is more free than the gross.

> This applies to

> practices which uses the subtler aspects of body,

> mind as opposed to

> practices which uses the gross.

>

> Even in Lalitopakhyana this is evident. Bhandasura

> if i remember

> accomplishes his process of de-kamifying universe by

> assuming form of air.

>

> Gender for me is a construct in the gross body. So

> too much talk about

> the supreme was female and lingam coming out of

> yonis etc is again

> dabbling in grosser aspects of being. And to top it

> off you started

> quoting examples from archaelogy and images of lajja

> gauri which is

> even more in the gross realm. All this led me to

> make the statement

> that "You understand ShaktiSadhana from a gross

> level".

>

>

> >

> > [2] I have the following question. 1) Is manmatha

> dead or alive ? (I

> > mean at present, I assume all people reading are

> in the same

> > universe and in same time)"

> >

> > What do you think? Based from your understanding,

> during that

> > quickie reading session, Is manmatha dead?

>

> I am asking the present situation, all this

> happens in cycle. So is

> manmatha dead or alive now, i dont know.

> >

> > "[3] The Homas etc seems to be rather costly to

> perform since they

> > need waters from five oceans etc"

> >

> > In many of Krisha story, one it is said that he

> made love to all the

> > Gopi girls. Do you think he did that?

>

> May be, there may be Yogic sidhis which allow

> one to do that?.

> Or atleast using techniques in mental field several

> gopis could be

> infatuated to a single person. It is possible.

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mail - You care about security. So do we.

 

[Guest guest]

Pradeep wrote : Gender for me is a construct in the gross body. So

too much talk about the supreme was female and lingam coming out of

yonis etc is again dabbling in grosser aspects of being. And to top

it off you started quoting examples from archaelogy and images of

lajja gauri which is even more in the gross realm. All this led me

to make the statement that "You understand Shakti Sadhana from a

gross level".

 

 

But do you understand in the first place what shakti sadhana is all

about? Are you into shakti sadhana? If you are not, how can you

comment about another? Questions like : do you dress up your husband

as devi and worship him, tells me that you actually do not know

anything about shakti sadhana or your view about shakti sadhana is

different from what I am being taught. Have you ever consider this?.

Okay let put this aside.

 

To me you are looking from a very different view. That particular

message I posted is all about my own personal experience. Mind you I

was reluctant but I feel I must to clear certain issues. Look at the

original message , somehow it let to Sex talk again, and all those

hullubala about Kaula and Samaya. I, some how still got stuck with

the Yoni-lingam image, because in my opinion, image represents

something : an idea, an approach, an avenue. But what? I keep on

asking myself. I only got a hint : `it siva emerging from

Yoni'. It

is a new idea to me. Thus a quest to find this understanding. What I

did is that I bring forth that image and visualise in my head. I see

myself going round and round the yoni-lingam trying to see it from

all the different angle. Our mind is like a tape recorder [ from my

viewpoint ] and it begans to replay all the others information I

have keep buried. Thus Lajjahgauri and many others came into the

picture. Suddenly a faint voice from within whisper : "there is

not

authority text but the LalitopAkhyAna". And thereafter I see

myself

[ like in a movie ] the whole scene from LalitopAkhyAna. Somehow I

got stuck with the scene : The Lalita Parameshwari so manifested,

created a male form from within Herself. His name was Kameshwara.

 

And I look again at the yoni-lingam. To me that is the logic : how

do you visualise the image "created a male form from within

Herself". As Bhasurananda Natha remarked once in his conversation

:

visualisation is very important and powerful. And like a child , I

was so excited, I waited from my guru to come and even before I

could finish about my so called "discovery" he remarked :

Nora I

know what you are about to tell me.

 

Am I looking from the gross level? Pupal Jaykar, writings on

insights, touches on the heart of pratyabhjnA. She states :

 

"The Movement of insight a voyage into time, into the past

limitless. The awakening of insight demands a seeing, listening,

which is the awakening of all the senses simulateneously, so that,

in that instant, fragmentation ends. The senses flowing

simultaneously is a state of flowering, an awakeness, in which the

barriers of the within and without cease. A state that perceives the

object, the "what is", with all the senses alive, apprehends

object

without the perception being held or transformed by object. And so

the seeing, listening, continues without obstacles to inhibit it or

give it direction. This stream of perception having no banks and no

intention is an instant eternity. Insight does not search. It sees

the within and the without of objects, grasps it as a whole. This

seeing is the creative ground that makes luminous and reveals. In

this state the holistic is the perception. Out of this arises

insight and skill in action. [with] this insight and skill the

manifestation and presencing of the formless is inevitable"

 

 

Now what do I learnt from this whole experience :

[1] the learning process of self discovery, is more meaningful and

which will eventually lead one to a more profound experience.

[2] never discard new ideas. Just because it does not conform to

your idea or what ever you are being taught, you should try to look

at it. Try to find an understanding first before we even condemn or

push them away.

[Guest guest]

-

>

>

> But do you understand in the first place what shakti sadhana is all

> about? Are you into shakti sadhana?

 

I dont know, i am into enquiry?. All beings have shakti, i see and

type, it is my shakti in action.

 

> asking myself. I only got a hint : `it siva emerging from

> Yoni'. It

 

All things born of Yoni is karmically bound. By definition Siva is

svatantra and above all the karmic malas. So i dont know how shiva can

come out of a yoni.

[Guest guest]

pradeep kumar wrote: All things born of Yoni is karmically bound. By

definition Siva is svatantra and above all the karmic malas. So i

dont know how shiva can come out of a yoni.

 

 

That is you what are being taught. You are right in your own way,

and neither are we wrong. But As far as Sri Vidya is concern Shakti

DID create Shiva based on our permises supported by the scriptures.

If you find this hard to swollow, to bad, but please remember that

you are in a Shakti group and We are Shaktas.

[Guest guest]

Dear Nora:

 

I think you've finally reached the crux of the problem with Pradeep.

 

I have been silently following this thread from its beginning and

have understood for some time that Pradeep is not interested in

learning anything about Shakta; he is simply seeking to contradict

it with information he's learned elsewhere.

 

Some of his statements -- such as "i dont understand the esoteric

meaning, please explain" and "who or what is devi? since you know

and i dont know you can educate me" -- are transparently

disingenuous and smack of distasteful intellectual pride and smug

self-regard.

 

Others -- such as "how many devis are in this group, who can create

life without aid of a man?" and "you do not know much about shakti

sadhana except only at a very gross level" -- simply show a rude and

ill-mannered fellow who doesn't know how to be a guest in another's

home.

 

You responded to Pradeep with grace and respect even though these

qualities were totally lacking from his posts to you. And you have

now brought the conversation to the Truth that any wise person would

have understood from the beginning: "You are right in your own way,

and neither are we wrong ... You are in a Shakti group and We are

Shaktas."

 

What more is there to say?

 

DB

 

 

, "NMadasamy" <nmadasamy@s...>

wrote:

 

That is you what are being taught. You are right in your own way,

and neither are we wrong. But As far as Sri Vidya is concern Shakti

DID create Shiva based on our permises supported by the scriptures.

If you find this hard to swollow, to bad, but please remember that

you are in a Shakti group and We are Shaktas.

>

> pradeep kumar wrote: All things born of Yoni is karmically bound.

By

> definition Siva is svatantra and above all the karmic malas. So i

> dont know how shiva can come out of a yoni.

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Funny, I didn't see him that way at all, I thought the

shoe was on the other foot, in fact. I considered that

Nora was the one being rude, by mocking posts she

didn't agree with, and Pradeep was poking a little fun

at her, trying to burst that ego-bubble. But we all

perceive things differently, just as I said before.

Lilith M.

--- Devi Bhakta <devi_bhakta wrote:

>

> Dear Nora:

>

> I think you've finally reached the crux of the

> problem with Pradeep.

>

> I have been silently following this thread from its

> beginning and

> have understood for some time that Pradeep is not

> interested in

> learning anything about Shakta; he is simply seeking

> to contradict

> it with information he's learned elsewhere.

>

> Some of his statements -- such as "i dont understand

> the esoteric

> meaning, please explain" and "who or what is devi?

> since you know

> and i dont know you can educate me" -- are

> transparently

> disingenuous and smack of distasteful intellectual

> pride and smug

> self-regard.

>

> Others -- such as "how many devis are in this group,

> who can create

> life without aid of a man?" and "you do not know

> much about shakti

> sadhana except only at a very gross level" -- simply

> show a rude and

> ill-mannered fellow who doesn't know how to be a

> guest in another's

> home.

>

> You responded to Pradeep with grace and respect even

> though these

> qualities were totally lacking from his posts to

> you. And you have

> now brought the conversation to the Truth that any

> wise person would

> have understood from the beginning: "You are right

> in your own way,

> and neither are we wrong ... You are in a Shakti

> group and We are

> Shaktas."

>

> What more is there to say?

>

> DB

>

>

> , "NMadasamy"

> <nmadasamy@s...>

> wrote:

>

> That is you what are being taught. You are right in

> your own way,

> and neither are we wrong. But As far as Sri Vidya is

> concern Shakti

> DID create Shiva based on our permises supported by

> the scriptures.

> If you find this hard to swollow, to bad, but please

> remember that

> you are in a Shakti group and We are Shaktas.

>

> >

> > pradeep kumar wrote: All things born of Yoni is

> karmically bound.

> By

> > definition Siva is svatantra and above all the

> karmic malas. So i

> > dont know how shiva can come out of a yoni.

> >

> >

> >

>

>

>

>

 

 

 

 

 

 

The all-new My - What will yours do?

 

[Guest guest]

That's for sure.

 

DB

 

, Lili Masamura

<sephirah5> wrote:

>

> Funny, I didn't see him that way at all ...

 

But we all

> perceive things differently, just as I said before.

> Lilith M.

> --- Devi Bhakta <devi_bhakta> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Nora:

> >

> > I think you've finally reached the crux of the

> > problem with Pradeep.