Guest guest Posted August 15, 2001 Report Share Posted August 15, 2001 At 12:24 AM 8/16/01 +0200, you wrote: >Dear devotees, > >a few days ago I was surfing the web for information about Lakshmidevi, the consort of Lord Vishnu. I found a website about Durgadevi in her Mahaa Lakshmi form. Below her picture was this statement that a lot of people come to the temple of Mahaa Lakshmi in the misguided belief that she is Lakshmidevi. So I am quite confused now, I too used to think that Mahaa Lakshmi was the consort of Lord Vishnu, not knowing that a form of the Devi Durga is also called Mahaa Lakshmi. Can any of you devotees clear this up for me? Why is Durga also Mahaa lakshmi? And how can you recognise either one of them, what attributes do they carry? > >Namaste >Reshma The outward clarification can be obtained from the Rahasyathraiyam at the end of DEvI MAhAthmyam. But the matter is deeper - very very deep. Regards JayBee =============== _______ Get your free @ address at Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 16, 2001 Report Share Posted August 16, 2001 Hi Reshma, I hope you are doing well ) I hope that this is of some use to you, and that my own admitted verbosity here isn't too overwhelming. This post is in response to your question about Laxmi and Durga, and the confusion within their personalities (by the way, i do know the website of which you are speaking and the exact picture, and the statement about it, that is so confusing). I am going to try and approach the matter in more of an academic and materialist manner than a religious one, even though i do consider myself, to a degree, a Devi-bhaktha. Now, you know that Hinduism is composed of various and diverse sects that have some degree of overlap as far as a mutual pantheon goes. Thus Saivites, regarding Siva as supreme, will nevertheless contain Vishnu, Surya, Shaniscara etc... in their myths and temples. Likewise, Vaishnavites, while holding Hari as supreme, will also include Siva, Ganesh and other gods within their mythologies and temples. Shaktha worship, the adoration of Devi in Hinduism, is its own sect, and worshippers of Shakthi (Devi), will regard the Devi as the quintessential manifestation of the Parabrahman, in the same way in which people with other Ishtadevatas (such as Vishnu or Shiva) would view their chosen gods (or metaphors for the sacred and the numinous,... which is basically what any god of any religion is... the important thing to remember is that these are constructed, under whatever motivations, by humans). Now, the writers of the sacred scriptures of Vishnu and Shiva often will say in their texts that the Supreme God (Vishnu for one sect, Shiva for another), has manifested as the Trimurthi, while at the same time stating that the supreme being has also manifested itself, in the form of the focal deity of the text, as something beyond the Trimurthi and containing universal power within itself. So, for example, the Narayaneeyam says that Vishnu is THE supreme god, but also that Vishnu is transcendant of the "other" Vishnu represented in the Trimurthi (the Trimurthi being just a representation of the Supreme Vishnu's own power).The Trimurthi Vishnu is part of a Brahmanical formulae, that of the gunas, from which he is inseparable, while the Supreme Vishnu is a Universal, transcendental god who is an object of reverence and devotion. That is, that the Trimurthi is an expression of Vishnu's power (in the Vaishanava case) in a triple form conforming to the theology of the three gunas. So there seems to exist in this theology 2 Vishnus: One who is the supreme purusha (responsive to Bhakthi), and the other a manifestation of that purusha as part of the formula of the 3 gunas represented in the Trimurthi (responsive to ritual). Saivites likewise have such a theology, yet Siva is the supreme purusha in their texts. Okay, i hope all that isn't too confusing, but i guess regarding theologies as pluralistic and overlapping as those among Indians and other SouthEast Asians, some degree of confusion may be expected. Anyhoo, the point is that many dominant Indian theologies use the formula of the gunas (represented by the Trimurthi) to express the inherent power of the Ishtadevata, even if it means replicating the Ishtadevata within the trimurthi, or vice-versa. And so it is for Shaktha theology. Devi is said to have manifested herself as the Trimurthi as well: as MahaKali (Vishnu's Yoganidra, regarded as the slayer of Madhu and Kaitaba), MahaLaxmi (DurgaAmman, slayer of Mahishasura) and MahaSaraswathi (Kausiki, the slayer of Sumbha and Nisumbha). And each of these manifestations is held by Shakthas as expressing the formulae of the gunas even as the male trimurthi does for Shaivites and Vaishnavites. So, MahaKali is the Tamas (inertia) manifestation of Devi, MahaLaxmi is considered her Rajas (passionate) manifestation, and MahaSaraswathi is her Sattva (purity) form. But none of these goddesses are considered, in Shaktha theology, as the identical "personality" as their namesakes. In Shaktha theology, Kali herself is a powerfull and primordial manifestation of Devi and is not the same "personality" as the tamasic MahaKali of the guna-inspired Shaktha Trimurthi. Likewise, neither is the rajasic MahaLaxmi considered the same as LaxmiAmman, nor the sattvic MahaSaraswathi the same as the Goddess of Learning. A certain myth also tells the story of the Devi assuming this female Trimurthi form: It is said that Devi engaged in severe austerities and meditation for 9 days, while balancing herself on the tip of a needle, in order to harness the powers neccessery to destroy the forces which threatened the cosmic order. On the first 3 days she was MahaKali, on the next 3 she was MahaLaxmi, and on the last 3 she was MahaSarasvathi. On the 10th day, having completed her disciplines, she embodied all the powers of the Trimuthi and at the same time was transcendant of them. This is one of the myths associated with the feasts of Navarathri and Vijayadasami. And furthermore, to demonstrate the guna-based theology of this concept, pay attention to the wording the pujari may use when offering flowers during sahasranamam at a Bagavathi temple. You will notice the pujari tossing flowers at Devi with the recital of each of her names, and when he refers to her as "MahaKali, MahaLaxmi, MahaSarasvathi", he will offer one toss of flowers for the three names, thus demonstrating their theological identity as a united Trimurthi (a "3 in One" theology, if i may use the Christian explaination of their Trinity). Also, it is not unknown for Devi to absorb the names and traits of other Indian deities. In Kerala, she is known as Ammae Narayana, and at her temple in Chottanikara the devotees often refer to her simply as "Narayana". In many localised village myths in the South, she is sometimes called Brahma Shakthi. In far Northern India, she has a sacred shrine where she is refered to as Vaishnu Devi. Many sacred Shaivite and Shaktha texts will also refer to Devi as "Siva" or "Krishna", while feeling no ambiguity (ironically enough) about doing so. This practice has its iconographic counterpart: often Devi is shown carrying the idiosynchratic emblems of other gods and goddesses in her hands. This practice may have its origins in the conceptual framework of Shaktha theology. Shakthi is considered the underpinning power of all things in the cosmos (the name Shakthi itself means "power" or "energy"). So the belief in this theology is that all gods and goddesses have their basic root in Shakthi, and they are all representations of her power, and thus have no real individual existence apart from her (again, this is according to this specific theology). Myths about Devi show her expressing in embodied form the existential dependance the other gods are said to have on her: In her battle with Sumbha and Nisumbha, in the Devi Mahatmyam, the Devi evokes herself as the underlying power of many of the important male gods of India. So she appears as Maheswari (power of Shiva), Vaishnavi , Varahi, Narasimhi (powers of Vishnu), Brahmi (power of Brahma), Kaumari (power of Muruga), Aindri (power of Indra) and even the underlying power of her own personality (Sivadutti and/or Chamundeshwari). Shaktha theology does not only make her the primordial root power of male gods, but also of goddesses. Thus the Shakthis of Laxmi, consort of Vishnu, are called the AsthaLaxmi (8 Laxmis). These are the representations of the shakthi (or underlying power) of Laxmi, which is again, in Shaktha theology, the Devi. While these are the powers of Laxmi and belong to her, the iconography of these goddesses show them to be based on the image of Durga, and their theological identity (like the shakthis of other gods) makes them aspects of Durga belonging (in this case) to Laxmi. Well, that is the concept behind most Shaktha theology. I hope it may clear some things up about the confusion of the Devi and LaxmiAmman. I know the picture of MahaLaxmi of which you speak and why it is confusing. I guess the author on the Hindu-Shaktha page wanted to point out that this MahaLaxmi represented in that specific temple was the Rajasic manifestation of Devi, rather than a representation of LaxmiAmman. One way in which a person can tell the difference between the Shaktha MahaLaxmi and the Viashnava LaxmiAmman is that the former is distinctly militant (in the photo on the HinduShaktha page, you will notice that the goddess holds Shanka and Chakra... both military paraphenalia), while the latter is more pacifistic and really does not tolerate bloodshed in her vicinity (iconographically, she holds images of prosperity and abundance rather than weapons of war). There are other dimensions too... i once read the work of a Japanese anthropologist working and living in Kerala which puts both the Vaishnava Laxmi and the Shaktha BadhraKali into an ecological constellation of deities based on the rythms of harvest and monsoon activity in the paddy feild. But if anyone is interested, we can go into that latter. To explain it now would make things too confusing, so i will leave it at that. Take good care all!!!! ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 16, 2001 Report Share Posted August 16, 2001 A very elaborate and informative explanation provided by nasre94678, I guess alot of us benefitted from it, thanks!! Pria Iyer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 16, 2001 Report Share Posted August 16, 2001 really difficult to understand Her however wise and intelligent u r. SHE can only be experienced. do upasana sincerely and devotedly for a longtime. u sould understand Her more clearly and would not speak further, since u would be intoxicated with HER bliss. s.krishnamoorthy - <nasre94678 <> Friday, August 17, 2001 2:30 AM Re: Maha-laxmi / Durga > Hi Reshma, > I hope you are doing well ) > I hope that this is of some use to you, and that my own admitted verbosity > here isn't too overwhelming. This post is in response to your question about > Laxmi and Durga, and the confusion within their personalities (by the way, i > do know the website of which you are speaking and the exact picture, and the > statement about it, that is so confusing). I am going to try and approach the > matter in more of an academic and materialist manner than a religious one, > even though i do consider myself, to a degree, a Devi-bhaktha. > Now, you know that Hinduism is composed of various and diverse sects that > have some degree of overlap as far as a mutual pantheon goes. Thus Saivites, > regarding Siva as supreme, will nevertheless contain Vishnu, Surya, > Shaniscara etc... in their myths and temples. Likewise, Vaishnavites, while > holding Hari as supreme, will also include Siva, Ganesh and other gods within > their mythologies and temples. Shaktha worship, the adoration of Devi in > Hinduism, is its own sect, and worshippers of Shakthi (Devi), will regard the > Devi as the quintessential manifestation of the Parabrahman, in the same way > in which people with other Ishtadevatas (such as Vishnu or Shiva) would view > their chosen gods (or metaphors for the sacred and the numinous,... which is > basically what any god of any religion is... the important thing to remember > is that these are constructed, under whatever motivations, by humans). > Now, the writers of the sacred scriptures of Vishnu and Shiva often will say > in their texts that the Supreme God (Vishnu for one sect, Shiva for another), > has manifested as the Trimurthi, while at the same time stating that the > supreme being has also manifested itself, in the form of the focal deity of > the text, as something beyond the Trimurthi and containing universal power > within itself. So, for example, the Narayaneeyam says that Vishnu is THE > supreme god, but also that Vishnu is transcendant of the "other" Vishnu > represented in the Trimurthi (the Trimurthi being just a representation of > the Supreme Vishnu's own power).The Trimurthi Vishnu is part of a Brahmanical > formulae, that of the gunas, from which he is inseparable, while the Supreme > Vishnu is a Universal, transcendental god who is an object of reverence and > devotion. That is, that the Trimurthi is an expression of Vishnu's power (in > the Vaishanava case) in a triple form conforming to the theology of the three > gunas. So there seems to exist in this theology 2 Vishnus: One who is the > supreme purusha (responsive to Bhakthi), and the other a manifestation of > that purusha as part of the formula of the 3 gunas represented in the > Trimurthi (responsive to ritual). Saivites likewise have such a theology, > yet Siva is the supreme purusha in their texts. > Okay, i hope all that isn't too confusing, but i guess regarding theologies > as pluralistic and overlapping as those among Indians and other SouthEast > Asians, some degree of confusion may be expected. > Anyhoo, the point is that many dominant Indian theologies use the formula of > the gunas (represented by the Trimurthi) to express the inherent power of the > Ishtadevata, even if it means replicating the Ishtadevata within the > trimurthi, or vice-versa. And so it is for Shaktha theology. Devi is said to > have manifested herself as the Trimurthi as well: as MahaKali (Vishnu's > Yoganidra, regarded as the slayer of Madhu and Kaitaba), MahaLaxmi > (DurgaAmman, slayer of Mahishasura) and MahaSaraswathi (Kausiki, the slayer > of Sumbha and Nisumbha). And each of these manifestations is held by > Shakthas as expressing the formulae of the gunas even as the male trimurthi > does for Shaivites and Vaishnavites. So, MahaKali is the Tamas (inertia) > manifestation of Devi, MahaLaxmi is considered her Rajas (passionate) > manifestation, and MahaSaraswathi is her Sattva (purity) form. But none of > these goddesses are considered, in Shaktha theology, as the identical > "personality" as their namesakes. In Shaktha theology, Kali herself is a > powerfull and primordial manifestation of Devi and is not the same > "personality" as the tamasic MahaKali of the guna-inspired Shaktha Trimurthi. > Likewise, neither is the rajasic MahaLaxmi considered the same as LaxmiAmman, > nor the sattvic MahaSaraswathi the same as the Goddess of Learning. > A certain myth also tells the story of the Devi assuming this female > Trimurthi form: It is said that Devi engaged in severe austerities and > meditation for 9 days, while balancing herself on the tip of a needle, in > order to harness the powers neccessery to destroy the forces which threatened > the cosmic order. On the first 3 days she was MahaKali, on the next 3 she > was MahaLaxmi, and on the last 3 she was MahaSarasvathi. On the 10th day, > having completed her disciplines, she embodied all the powers of the Trimuthi > and at the same time was transcendant of them. This is one of the myths > associated with the feasts of Navarathri and Vijayadasami. > And furthermore, to demonstrate the guna-based theology of this concept, pay > attention to the wording the pujari may use when offering flowers during > sahasranamam at a Bagavathi temple. You will notice the pujari tossing > flowers at Devi with the recital of each of her names, and when he refers to > her as "MahaKali, MahaLaxmi, MahaSarasvathi", he will offer one toss of > flowers for the three names, thus demonstrating their theological identity as > a united Trimurthi (a "3 in One" theology, if i may use the Christian > explaination of their Trinity). > Also, it is not unknown for Devi to absorb the names and traits of other > Indian deities. In Kerala, she is known as Ammae Narayana, and at her temple > in Chottanikara the devotees often refer to her simply as "Narayana". In many > localised village myths in the South, she is sometimes called Brahma Shakthi. > In far Northern India, she has a sacred shrine where she is refered to as > Vaishnu Devi. Many sacred Shaivite and Shaktha texts will also refer to Devi > as "Siva" or "Krishna", while feeling no ambiguity (ironically enough) about > doing so. This practice has its iconographic counterpart: often Devi is shown > carrying the idiosynchratic emblems of other gods and goddesses in her hands. > This practice may have its origins in the conceptual framework of Shaktha > theology. Shakthi is considered the underpinning power of all things in the > cosmos (the name Shakthi itself means "power" or "energy"). So the belief in > this theology is that all gods and goddesses have their basic root in > Shakthi, and they are all representations of her power, and thus have no real > individual existence apart from her (again, this is according to this > specific theology). Myths about Devi show her expressing in embodied form the > existential dependance the other gods are said to have on her: In her battle > with Sumbha and Nisumbha, in the Devi Mahatmyam, the Devi evokes herself as > the underlying power of many of the important male gods of India. So she > appears as Maheswari (power of Shiva), Vaishnavi , Varahi, Narasimhi (powers > of Vishnu), Brahmi (power of Brahma), Kaumari (power of Muruga), Aindri > (power of Indra) and even the underlying power of her own personality > (Sivadutti and/or Chamundeshwari). > Shaktha theology does not only make her the primordial root power of male > gods, but also of goddesses. Thus the Shakthis of Laxmi, consort of Vishnu, > are called the AsthaLaxmi (8 Laxmis). These are the representations of the > shakthi (or underlying power) of Laxmi, which is again, in Shaktha theology, > the Devi. While these are the powers of Laxmi and belong to her, the > iconography of these goddesses show them to be based on the image of Durga, > and their theological identity (like the shakthis of other gods) makes them > aspects of Durga belonging (in this case) to Laxmi. > Well, that is the concept behind most Shaktha theology. I hope it may clear > some things up about the confusion of the Devi and LaxmiAmman. I know the > picture of MahaLaxmi of which you speak and why it is confusing. I guess the > author on the Hindu-Shaktha page wanted to point out that this MahaLaxmi > represented in that specific temple was the Rajasic manifestation of Devi, > rather than a representation of LaxmiAmman. One way in which a person can > tell the difference between the Shaktha MahaLaxmi and the Viashnava > LaxmiAmman is that the former is distinctly militant (in the photo on the > HinduShaktha page, you will notice that the goddess holds Shanka and > Chakra... both military paraphenalia), while the latter is more pacifistic > and really does not tolerate bloodshed in her vicinity (iconographically, she > holds images of prosperity and abundance rather than weapons of war). > There are other dimensions too... i once read the work of a Japanese > anthropologist working and living in Kerala which puts both the Vaishnava > Laxmi and the Shaktha BadhraKali into an ecological constellation of deities > based on the rythms of harvest and monsoon activity in the paddy feild. But > if anyone is interested, we can go into that latter. To explain it now would > make things too confusing, so i will leave it at that. > Take good care all!!!! ) > > > > > > > > AUM shrImAtre namaH > AUM namaH shivAya > AUM namaH shivAbhyAm > > Archives : http://www.ambaa.org/ (Edited) > : /messages// > > Contact : help > > Your use of is subject to > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 17, 2001 Report Share Posted August 17, 2001 SO! SO! SO! TRUE... all I have to say is 'WELL SAID'!!!!! On Fri, 17 Aug 2001 07:07:07 +0530 kaushik <kaushik wrote: > really difficult to understand Her however wise and intelligent > u r. SHE can only be experienced. do upasana sincerely > and devotedly for a longtime. u sould understand Her more > clearly and would not speak further, since u would be > intoxicated with HER bliss. s.krishnamoorthy > > - > <nasre94678 > <> > Friday, August 17, 2001 2:30 AM > Re: Maha-laxmi / Durga > > > > Hi Reshma, > > I hope you are doing well ) > > I hope that this is of some use to you, and that my own admitted verbosity > > here isn't too overwhelming. This post is in response to your question > about > > Laxmi and Durga, and the confusion within their personalities (by the way, > i > > do know the website of which you are speaking and the exact picture, and > the > > statement about it, that is so confusing). I am going to try and approach > the > > matter in more of an academic and materialist manner than a religious one, > > even though i do consider myself, to a degree, a Devi-bhaktha. > > Now, you know that Hinduism is composed of various and diverse sects that > > have some degree of overlap as far as a mutual pantheon goes. Thus > Saivites, > > regarding Siva as supreme, will nevertheless contain Vishnu, Surya, > > Shaniscara etc... in their myths and temples. Likewise, Vaishnavites, > while > > holding Hari as supreme, will also include Siva, Ganesh and other gods > within > > their mythologies and temples. Shaktha worship, the adoration of Devi in > > Hinduism, is its own sect, and worshippers of Shakthi (Devi), will regard > the > > Devi as the quintessential manifestation of the Parabrahman, in the same > way > > in which people with other Ishtadevatas (such as Vishnu or Shiva) would > view > > their chosen gods (or metaphors for the sacred and the numinous,... which > is > > basically what any god of any religion is... the important thing to > remember > > is that these are constructed, under whatever motivations, by humans). > > Now, the writers of the sacred scriptures of Vishnu and Shiva often will > say > > in their texts that the Supreme God (Vishnu for one sect, Shiva for > another), > > has manifested as the Trimurthi, while at the same time stating that the > > supreme being has also manifested itself, in the form of the focal deity > of > > the text, as something beyond the Trimurthi and containing universal power > > within itself. So, for example, the Narayaneeyam says that Vishnu is THE > > supreme god, but also that Vishnu is transcendant of the "other" Vishnu > > represented in the Trimurthi (the Trimurthi being just a representation of > > the Supreme Vishnu's own power).The Trimurthi Vishnu is part of a > Brahmanical > > formulae, that of the gunas, from which he is inseparable, while the > Supreme > > Vishnu is a Universal, transcendental god who is an object of reverence > and > > devotion. That is, that the Trimurthi is an expression of Vishnu's power > (in > > the Vaishanava case) in a triple form conforming to the theology of the > three > > gunas. So there seems to exist in this theology 2 Vishnus: One who is the > > supreme purusha (responsive to Bhakthi), and the other a manifestation of > > that purusha as part of the formula of the 3 gunas represented in the > > Trimurthi (responsive to ritual). Saivites likewise have such a > theology, > > yet Siva is the supreme purusha in their texts. > > Okay, i hope all that isn't too confusing, but i guess regarding > theologies > > as pluralistic and overlapping as those among Indians and other SouthEast > > Asians, some degree of confusion may be expected. > > Anyhoo, the point is that many dominant Indian theologies use the formula > of > > the gunas (represented by the Trimurthi) to express the inherent power of > the > > Ishtadevata, even if it means replicating the Ishtadevata within the > > trimurthi, or vice-versa. And so it is for Shaktha theology. Devi is said > to > > have manifested herself as the Trimurthi as well: as MahaKali (Vishnu's > > Yoganidra, regarded as the slayer of Madhu and Kaitaba), MahaLaxmi > > (DurgaAmman, slayer of Mahishasura) and MahaSaraswathi (Kausiki, the > slayer > > of Sumbha and Nisumbha). And each of these manifestations is held by > > Shakthas as expressing the formulae of the gunas even as the male > trimurthi > > does for Shaivites and Vaishnavites. So, MahaKali is the Tamas (inertia) > > manifestation of Devi, MahaLaxmi is considered her Rajas (passionate) > > manifestation, and MahaSaraswathi is her Sattva (purity) form. But none of > > these goddesses are considered, in Shaktha theology, as the identical > > "personality" as their namesakes. In Shaktha theology, Kali herself is a > > powerfull and primordial manifestation of Devi and is not the same > > "personality" as the tamasic MahaKali of the guna-inspired Shaktha > Trimurthi. > > Likewise, neither is the rajasic MahaLaxmi considered the same as > LaxmiAmman, > > nor the sattvic MahaSaraswathi the same as the Goddess of Learning. > > A certain myth also tells the story of the Devi assuming this female > > Trimurthi form: It is said that Devi engaged in severe austerities and > > meditation for 9 days, while balancing herself on the tip of a needle, in > > order to harness the powers neccessery to destroy the forces which > threatened > > the cosmic order. On the first 3 days she was MahaKali, on the next 3 she > > was MahaLaxmi, and on the last 3 she was MahaSarasvathi. On the 10th day, > > having completed her disciplines, she embodied all the powers of the > Trimuthi > > and at the same time was transcendant of them. This is one of the myths > > associated with the feasts of Navarathri and Vijayadasami. > > And furthermore, to demonstrate the guna-based theology of this concept, > pay > > attention to the wording the pujari may use when offering flowers during > > sahasranamam at a Bagavathi temple. You will notice the pujari tossing > > flowers at Devi with the recital of each of her names, and when he refers > to > > her as "MahaKali, MahaLaxmi, MahaSarasvathi", he will offer one toss of > > flowers for the three names, thus demonstrating their theological identity > as > > a united Trimurthi (a "3 in One" theology, if i may use the Christian > > explaination of their Trinity). > > Also, it is not unknown for Devi to absorb the names and traits of other > > Indian deities. In Kerala, she is known as Ammae Narayana, and at her > temple > > in Chottanikara the devotees often refer to her simply as "Narayana". In > many > > localised village myths in the South, she is sometimes called Brahma > Shakthi. > > In far Northern India, she has a sacred shrine where she is refered to as > > Vaishnu Devi. Many sacred Shaivite and Shaktha texts will also refer to > Devi > > as "Siva" or "Krishna", while feeling no ambiguity (ironically enough) > about > > doing so. This practice has its iconographic counterpart: often Devi is > shown > > carrying the idiosynchratic emblems of other gods and goddesses in her > hands. > > This practice may have its origins in the conceptual framework of Shaktha > > theology. Shakthi is considered the underpinning power of all things in > the > > cosmos (the name Shakthi itself means "power" or "energy"). So the belief > in > > this theology is that all gods and goddesses have their basic root in > > Shakthi, and they are all representations of her power, and thus have no > real > > individual existence apart from her (again, this is according to this > > specific theology). Myths about Devi show her expressing in embodied form > the > > existential dependance the other gods are said to have on her: In her > battle > > with Sumbha and Nisumbha, in the Devi Mahatmyam, the Devi evokes herself > as > > the underlying power of many of the important male gods of India. So she > > appears as Maheswari (power of Shiva), Vaishnavi , Varahi, Narasimhi > (powers > > of Vishnu), Brahmi (power of Brahma), Kaumari (power of Muruga), Aindri > > (power of Indra) and even the underlying power of her own personality > > (Sivadutti and/or Chamundeshwari). > > Shaktha theology does not only make her the primordial root power of male > > gods, but also of goddesses. Thus the Shakthis of Laxmi, consort of > Vishnu, > > are called the AsthaLaxmi (8 Laxmis). These are the representations of the > > shakthi (or underlying power) of Laxmi, which is again, in Shaktha > theology, > > the Devi. While these are the powers of Laxmi and belong to her, the > > iconography of these goddesses show them to be based on the image of > Durga, > > and their theological identity (like the shakthis of other gods) makes > them > > aspects of Durga belonging (in this case) to Laxmi. > > Well, that is the concept behind most Shaktha theology. I hope it may > clear > > some things up about the confusion of the Devi and LaxmiAmman. I know the > > picture of MahaLaxmi of which you speak and why it is confusing. I guess > the > > author on the Hindu-Shaktha page wanted to point out that this MahaLaxmi > > represented in that specific temple was the Rajasic manifestation of Devi, > > rather than a representation of LaxmiAmman. One way in which a person can > > tell the difference between the Shaktha MahaLaxmi and the Viashnava > > LaxmiAmman is that the former is distinctly militant (in the photo on the > > HinduShaktha page, you will notice that the goddess holds Shanka and > > Chakra... both military paraphenalia), while the latter is more pacifistic > > and really does not tolerate bloodshed in her vicinity (iconographically, > she > > holds images of prosperity and abundance rather than weapons of war). > > There are other dimensions too... i once read the work of a Japanese > > anthropologist working and living in Kerala which puts both the Vaishnava > > Laxmi and the Shaktha BadhraKali into an ecological constellation of > deities > > based on the rythms of harvest and monsoon activity in the paddy feild. > But > > if anyone is interested, we can go into that latter. To explain it now > would > > make things too confusing, so i will leave it at that. > > Take good care all!!!! ) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > AUM shrImAtre namaH > > AUM namaH shivAya > > AUM namaH shivAbhyAm > > > > Archives : http://www.ambaa.org/ (Edited) > > : /messages// > > > > Contact : help > > > > Your use of is subject to > > > > > > > AUM shrImAtre namaH > AUM namaH shivAya > AUM namaH shivAbhyAm > > Archives : http://www.ambaa.org/ (Edited) > : /messages// > > Contact : help > > Your use of is subject to > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.