Thrupurasundhari at Thiruvanmiyur

[Guest guest]

Dear Amba brothers and sisters

 

Thrupurasundhari at Thiruvanmiyur near Adyar is a form of Matha showing one of

the most beautiful form.

 

She is Varaprasadhini and you can get all your requests fulfilled.

 

Marundheesa or Aushadheeswara is the Shiva lingha swyambhu and had milk

abhisheka directly from Kamadhenu.

 

This is near Adyar ,Chennai

 

Bus routes are 1,1R,47D,23A etc.

 

You can see even today the foot prints of Kamadhenu on Lingha.

 

Lingha is white and see lines on the lingha they say is because of Kamashenu's

milk abhisheka.

 

Swami himself is medicine for both worldly diseases and egoes.

 

Have dharshan and get all in life.

 

Regards

 

Ramanan

 

 

 

 

 

Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now

 

 

[Guest guest]

Namaste dakinic_monk,

 

Ego is not inherently "bad." It is like a tool that is needed to

function in this world. Sri H. W. L. "Papaji" Poonja says that you

should wear your ego like you wear your clothes; you need them to go

outside and perform your dharma. But, our true ego-less state is like

being completely naked. It is the state of nirvikalpa samadhi which is

absolutely beyond any actions, conceptions, or words. Just as sages in

nirvikalpa samadhi are completely unaware of this phenomenal world and

can remain in this state for days or weeks, so are those who are naked

not so free to move about society. Ramakrishna's disciples had to use

various methods to bring the sage down from his heights of ego-less

ecstacy so he could give upadesha. Just so, we need ego to function in

the world.

 

But the point of sadhana is to remove the "clothes" of ego so that the

Self is uncovered. Refer to the symbolism of Kali holding the demon's

head and bloody sword, Chinnamasta holding her own head and drinking

her own blood, or Durga destroying Mahishasura, the stubborn buffalo

demon. These are all symbolic of destruction the ego. Once the ego is

destroyed and the Self is naked and shines forth as Brahman, then the

disciple is free and he can put his "clothes" back on or not. It is

then His free choice.

 

AUM

 

 

, "kalika Putra" <dakinic_monk>

wrote:

>

>

>

>

> One's ego is the form of mother, why would you want to subdue it?

Offcourse

> the ego is in a dreaming state and our consciousness is that very

dream the

> gradual awakening is represented with the chakras opening.

>

> I don't understand why ego is said to be a bad thing!

>

> http://greetings..au - Greetings

> - Send some online love

[Guest guest]

What you have written below is not in line with traditional vedanta.

Please refer to verses 299-316 of vivekachuuDamani, point by point

it will show how the traditional understanding is different. This

section is called "ahaN^kaara ninda" or Critique of ahaN^kaara.

There is a good English translation by P. Sankaranarayanan of

sringeri aacharya (shrii shrii chandrasekhara bhaarati svaminaH)

published by Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan. I would not like to go further

into this matter, as I want ambaaL to stay more on devotional side,

discussing traditional devotional material which are in line with

samayAchaara.

 

 

 

Thanks.

 

Ravi

 

 

, "sivadancer <sivadancer>"

<sivadancer> wrote:

> Namaste dakinic_monk,

>

> Ego is not inherently "bad." It is like a tool that is needed to

> function in this world. Sri H. W. L. "Papaji" Poonja says that you

> should wear your ego like you wear your clothes; you need them to

go

> outside and perform your dharma. But, our true ego-less state is

like

> being completely naked. It is the state of nirvikalpa samadhi

which is

> absolutely beyond any actions, conceptions, or words. Just as

sages in

> nirvikalpa samadhi are completely unaware of this phenomenal world

and

> can remain in this state for days or weeks, so are those who are

naked

> not so free to move about society. Ramakrishna's disciples had to

use

> various methods to bring the sage down from his heights of ego-

less

> ecstacy so he could give upadesha. Just so, we need ego to

function in

> the world.

>

> But the point of sadhana is to remove the "clothes" of ego so that

the

> Self is uncovered. Refer to the symbolism of Kali holding the

demon's

> head and bloody sword, Chinnamasta holding her own head and

drinking

> her own blood, or Durga destroying Mahishasura, the stubborn

buffalo

> demon. These are all symbolic of destruction the ego. Once the ego

is

> destroyed and the Self is naked and shines forth as Brahman, then

the

> disciple is free and he can put his "clothes" back on or not. It

is

> then His free choice.

>

> AUM

>

>

> , "kalika Putra" <dakinic_monk>

> wrote:

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > One's ego is the form of mother, why would you want to subdue

it?

> Offcourse

> > the ego is in a dreaming state and our consciousness is that

very

> dream the

> > gradual awakening is represented with the chakras opening.

> >

> > I don't understand why ego is said to be a bad thing!

> >

> > http://greetings..au - Greetings

> > - Send some online love

[Guest guest]

Thank you Ravi, I understand the focus of thie list, but I feel it is

appropriate to at least briefly quote the crucial verses from the

vivekachUDamani to point out my error, so others may not make the same

mistake.

 

"Mighty ego, even though cut root and all, if brought to life again

even for a moment, in thought, causes a hundred dissipations of

energy, as a cloud shaken by the wind in the rainy seasons, pours

forth its floods. [309]

 

After seizing the enemy, ego, no respite at all is to be given to it,

by thoughts of sensual objects. Just this is the cause of its coming

to life again, as water is of the lime tree that had withered away."

[310]

 

AUM

 

 

, "Ravi <miinalochanii>"

<miinalochanii> wrote:

> What you have written below is not in line with traditional vedanta.

> Please refer to verses 299-316 of vivekachuuDamani, point by point

> it will show how the traditional understanding is different. This

> section is called "ahaN^kaara ninda" or Critique of ahaN^kaara.

> There is a good English translation by P. Sankaranarayanan of

> sringeri aacharya (shrii shrii chandrasekhara bhaarati svaminaH)

> published by Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan. I would not like to go further

> into this matter, as I want ambaaL to stay more on devotional side,

> discussing traditional devotional material which are in line with

> samayAchaara.

>

>

>

> Thanks.

>

> Ravi

>

>

> , "sivadancer <sivadancer>"

> <sivadancer> wrote:

> > Namaste dakinic_monk,

> >

> > Ego is not inherently "bad." It is like a tool that is needed to

> > function in this world. Sri H. W. L. "Papaji" Poonja says that you

> > should wear your ego like you wear your clothes; you need them to

> go

> > outside and perform your dharma. But, our true ego-less state is

> like

> > being completely naked. It is the state of nirvikalpa samadhi

> which is

> > absolutely beyond any actions, conceptions, or words. Just as

> sages in

> > nirvikalpa samadhi are completely unaware of this phenomenal world

> and

> > can remain in this state for days or weeks, so are those who are

> naked

> > not so free to move about society. Ramakrishna's disciples had to

> use

> > various methods to bring the sage down from his heights of ego-

> less

> > ecstacy so he could give upadesha. Just so, we need ego to

> function in

> > the world.

> >

> > But the point of sadhana is to remove the "clothes" of ego so that

> the

> > Self is uncovered. Refer to the symbolism of Kali holding the

> demon's

> > head and bloody sword, Chinnamasta holding her own head and

> drinking

> > her own blood, or Durga destroying Mahishasura, the stubborn

> buffalo

> > demon. These are all symbolic of destruction the ego. Once the ego

> is

> > destroyed and the Self is naked and shines forth as Brahman, then

> the

> > disciple is free and he can put his "clothes" back on or not. It

> is

> > then His free choice.

> >

> > AUM