Guest guest Posted January 16, 2003 Report Share Posted January 16, 2003 a) Please do not address question to a specific person when sending it to the list. That is not a good practise and will stop others from answering you. b) Why is this pre-occupation with a name? How does it matter if someone else recognizes you or not as a shAkta or shaiva or vaishhNava. bhakti is a relationship between bhakta and bhagavati. It is like love. You know it when you are in it. Why do you need an external recognition or a name for it? How does it matter if I call you a shAkta or not. What matters and what only should matter is your bhakti towards shakti. If you have it, SHE will know it. c) Typically, when you call someone as shaiva, it is not based on any mantra initiation. One who considers shiva as the supreme Lord and worships as such is called shaiva or shaivite. Someone may be initiated to panchaxari and still may not be a shaivite, like many smArta-s are. I think a similar definition should be OK for shAkta, if a definition is asked for. Sometimes names could be misleading. Take for instance, when someone says he or she is a smArta. They typically say that based on birth. For all practical purpose, they may not even know what that name denotes, what smrti-s are, may be even incapable of following it (like me). Hence, if I call myself a smarta, it is not fully correct. BTW the correct nAmAvaLi form of shriimaata is Om shriimaatre namaH. You can simply say "My salutations or namaskarams to shriimaata". In Tamil, if you say shriimaata, then when you do namaskaaram you will say shriimaataaviRku (en) namaskAram. It is the Dative form (or 4th vibhakti). If you are in doubt about the correct dative form, you can post question to the list. Fortunately we have scholars like Aarathi and Dr. Bhavani. Ravi adi_shakthi16 <adi_shakthi16 [adi_shakthi16] Wednesday, January 15, 2003 5:31 PM this question is for minalochani ! dear raviji, please tell me who a shakta is! as per Satish, one who is initiated into a 'shakti' mantra is a shakta.... does this mean 1)all of those who read Sree lalita Sahasaranama, Devi Mahatmiyam and other scriptures, 2) offer daily prayers to the divine mother and do puja both manasik and physical 3) meditate on her divine form etc... are not then 'shaktas' ... by satish's definition, then half the people who claim they are shaktas are not shaktas... also, shri ramakrishna worshipped Kali but he also did puja to all the twelve jyothirlingas at the dakshineshwer temple , is he a shakta? some shaktas claim shaktas only worship shakti not shiva as per their definition! this is all very confusing! please clarify ! om sree matrayaii namaha! 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 January 16, 2003 Report Share Posted January 16, 2003 , "ravi" <ravi@a...> wrote: > b) Why is this pre-occupation with a name? How does it matter if someone > else recognizes you or not as a shAkta or shaiva or vaishhNava. bhakti is a > relationship between bhakta and bhagavati. It is like love. You know it > when you are in it. Why do you need an external recognition or a name for > it? How does it matter if I call you a shAkta or not. What matters and what > only should matter is your bhakti towards shakti. If you have it, SHE will > know it. Perfect. There is no need for an external recognition either by a brand name or otherwise. > > c) Typically, when you call someone as shaiva, it is not based on any mantra > initiation. One who considers shiva as the supreme Lord and worships as such > is called shaiva or shaivite. True to some extent. Going by the sholka" mAtA ca pArvatI devI pitA devo maheshvarH, bhAndhavAH shiva bhaktAshca......" meaining (Devi Parvati is Mother, Lord Shiva is Father, and all Shiva bhaktas are relatives..)every one who is a devotee of Shiva/Devi are in a general sense Shaivas or Shaktas. When I said " Those are initiated into shakta mantras and who follow the path laid down in the shakta scriptures are shaktas", that is to be understood in an academic or ritualistic sense. Reason: There is Kashmir Shaivam with its adherents, Siddhanta Shaivam with its own adherents , Pashupata Shaivam and many other shaivams many of which are non-existent today. They have their own rituals. A Shaiva is Kashmir Shaiva if he is initiated into that path by a Kash. Shaiva teacher and likewise for others. There is no general shaiva tantra but there are kash shaiva tantras, agamas, paddhatis(in Siddhanta Shaivam)..etc etc..which means that,to be call someone(i.e a Kash Shaiva, Siddhanta Shaiva) implies that he is initiated into that path. Same applies to different Shakta sub sects which is the reason for my mentioning of initiation as one of the things which will determine whether somone is Shakta or not. >Someone may be initiated to panchaxari and > still may not be a shaivite, like many smArta-s are. I think a similar > definition should be OK for shAkta, if a definition is asked for. They will just be smArtas who have a shaiva mantra. > AUM shrImAtre namaH > AUM namaH shivAya > AUM namaH shivAbhyAm > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 16, 2003 Report Share Posted January 16, 2003 Thank you ravi and satish for your detailed explanations... It really matters very little whether one is a shakta , shaivite or viashnavite - the goal is the same - that of 'enlightenment' ! i was just curious because many forums have definite requirements as to who is qualified to post on certain subjects etc... so, i just wanted a clarification... to me, these nmaes are just names... but out of intellectual curiosity i raised that question... also i addressed that question specifically to you Ravi only because i already knew what satish's views are on the subject (i respect him a lot; he knows so much) and i thought as a moderator , you might have a different viewpoint - that's all! this does not mean other members cannot share in the discussion... but i will keep this in mind for future reference! yes, satish, i hear what you are saying and i understand it... i MYSELF love kaskmir shaivism and love to read abinavagupta's texts on many subjects - in fact the conecept of shiva-shakti unity appeals to me a lot! i have a very open mind and i do want to learn the different paths of ambaal worship. also, ravi, on another note- i have already contacted aarathi on certain matters relating to 'sanskrit' specially the translation of periyaval's durgapancaratnam stotra and she said she would help me when she has time... thanks! oh by the way - i was just ending my post by bowing sown to MATA ! NOT particularly shrimata (one of her names from lS) but i thought i will add sree in front of mata and make it sree matrayaii nmaha! btw sanskrit used to be one of my subjects in high school but i have lost touch with it and now need to revive it! thank you satish and ravi for all your valuable comments! hari om! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 17, 2003 Report Share Posted January 17, 2003 > Ravi wrote : > ... > Fortunately we have scholars like Aarathi and Dr. Bhavani. n, Please add Dr JayBee also to this list. r Suresh 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.