The Theft Committed by AmbA - 2 of 2

[Guest guest]

The Theft Committed by AmbA

 

(...Continued)

 

 

The Acarya who accuses Amba of having stolen more than

half of her husband's body has himself stolen half of

the four that rightly belong to her. In the

Sahasranarnam itself Amba has the names, "Tejovati",

"Trinayana". There is also the appellation

"Carucandrakaladhara" meaning that she has the moon

adorning her head ("Candrasekhari). In

the Syamaladandakam, in the stanza dealing with the

presiding deity of Srividya, that is Amba, occurs

these two names, "Caturbhuje, Candrakalavatarnse": the

latter word means one who has the crescent

moon adorning her head. Actually, Amba does have the

crescent moon and the three eyes. The sastras also say

so and I have seen Amba depicted with them in old

paintings. However, the Acarya, who was omniscient,

pretends not to know this and in his hymn to the

Mother he says that he suspects that they (the

crescent moon and the three eyes) must have been

stolen from Father. He must have stated so thinking

thus : "Leave alone my omniscience. I am singing the

praises of Mother. Without taking a certain amount of

liberty, what kind of hymn do I compose if it cannot

be a ninda-stuti." Ordinary people believe that the

crescent moon and the three eyes truly belong to Siva

(alone). The Acarya, the sarvajna (the omniscient),

has expressed a view that is shared by common people.

 

Amba who stole Siva's body tried to hide the stolen

property. But where? In herself. She wanted to conceal

the body in herself. Just as there is Sakti in Siva,

there is Siva in Sakti. Amba swallowed one half of

Siva's body and that is how Ardhanarisvara came into

being. Mothers cannot be excelled in affection. In

their intense love for their children they exclaim as

they cuddle them : "I feel like eating you, chewing

you up." In the rush of love not only theft, even

murder, is committed.

 

What the Acarya spoke of as a case of theft - indeed

casting a doubt about his accusation by adding the

word "sanke" - I am stretching to a case of murder.

The Acarya himself has spoken of a "murder case" in

the Sivanandalahari and it is on the basis of it that

I am speaking now. What is that murder? Not one

murder, but a number of murders. And all committed by

the destroyer god Siva. He killed an elephant and wore

its skin and came to be called "Gajasamharamurti".

Another case

of "murder" is that of skinning a tiger. After this

murder Siva wore the skin round his waist. Again when

he appeared in the guise of a hunter he killed a wild

boar. During the time of samhara (dissolution) he

destroys all creatures.

 

With the skin of the elephant he killed as his upper

cloth, with the skin of the tiger he slew as his

loin-cloth and with a deer in one hand Siva looks to

the Acarya like a lion after killing an elephant and

like a tiger after catching a deer to eat it. Like the

lion that dwells in a cave, Siva resides in the cave

of our hearts. In his Sivanandalahari he says that,

after eating the elephant and the tiger, the Siva-lion

keeps their skins as their outward signs. Here he says

that, in the same way, Amba has swallowed Siva himself

and retained outwardly the crescent moon and the eye

in the forehead. The lion must have left the skins of

the elephant and the deer without munching them. In

the case of Amba, after all of Siva's body has gone

inside her, what seems an excess, the eye in the

forehead, protrudes outside. We may take it that the

crescent moon which is not a part of Siva's body also

thrusts itself out.

 

 

In truth there was neither theft nor murder. When we

say that the great Mrtyunjaya (conqueror of death)

never perishes even during the great deluge, How can

that Eternal Being be murdered? As for the theft,

poets have shown that it was in fact Siva who was

guilty of it. The credit must go to her for "a matter

and a half"; but the fame which was due to her was

stolen by him. What are these "one matter and a half"?

The burning of Kama, and the destruction of Kala (god

of death). Since the burning of Kama was accomplished

by the forehead eye of Ardhanarisvara, half the credit

for it should go to Amba. But Siva has, as

"Kamadahanamurti", appropriated all the fame for the

burning of Kama. The destruction of Kala was brought

about entirely by Amba, with her left foot (that is

Ardhanarisvara's left foot), so she deserves all the

credit, all the fame, for it. Siva has performed eight

heroic feats, and at eight sacred places. In

Tirukkurukkai he is in the aspect of the destroyer of

Kama (Kamadahanamurti) and in Tirukkadavur as

Kalasamharamurti. It is Amba who is the victim of the

theft committed by her husband. Siva is "taskaranam

pati" ("chief of thieves", according to Sri Rudram)

and he is so even with regard to his wife. However,

she remains the pativrata supreme, having offered not

only her body but also her Self to him.

 

The Acarya sees her with the eye of a poet and when he

says that Amba has stolen her husband's body entire he

creates aesthetic pleasure, literary rasa. The idea

behind the Acarya's statement is that Amba has

absorbed Siva in herself. Out of love for him she has

contained the Lord in herself. Since he is in her,

when we see her as Kamaksi in her full form, we do not

miss anything. If there is joy in worshipping Mother

and Father, is there not the same joy in seeing that

that Father is present in Mother herself. Just as we

are happy to think of Siva as "Tayumanavar" (Siva who

became Mother) we can also be happy in thinking of

Amba as "Tantaiyumanavar" (one who became Father).

 

The Brahman and the Brahma-Sakti are two. But they

need not be in two forms. Amba herself is the combined

form of Siva and Sakti. This non-dualistic truth is

the ultimate inner message of the stanza.

 

[After a few moments' silence, the Great Seer speaks

in an undertone...] The body (of Amba) is all a

radiance of red. We look at her thinking of her as

Amba alone, seeing each part of her body separately

in that red. We see her forehead eye and the crescent

moon. The two remind us of our deity [that is of the

Kanci Sankara Matha], Candramaulisvara. But if we try

to find out whether he is seen... No, he is not seen.

But for the two (the forehead eye and the crescent

moon) nothing else is seen of Siva's body.

 

[The Mahasvami speaks a little more loudly.]

 

It is in such a state of experience that the Acarya

asks : "O you who appropriated half his body and are

not satisfied with it have now stolen the rest of his

body also." The amrta, the nectar, that is Siva cannot

be shared. It must be consumed wholly. Amba did

precisely that.

[Guest guest]

After reading this post I was reciting sahasranama on the other day

and the following chain of nAmAs seemed to echo the same bhava,

 

sarvAruNA anavadyA~ngI sarvAbharaNa bhUshitA

shiva kameshvarA~nkasthA shivA svAdhIna vallabhA .. 21

 

sarvArunA: Who is of a red hued, all over.

anavadyA~ngI: Who is faultless in every limb.

sarvAbharaNa bhUshitA: Who is adorned with all ornaments (both of

shiva and of hers).

shiva kameshvarA~nkasthAa: Who resides in the anga of Kamesvara (one

half of kameshvara).

shiva: The Consort of Shiva.

svadhIna vallabhA: Who dominates over Her Consort.

 

Another interesting thing is, in Acharya's commentary he points to

the Sri Rudra mantra "asousya tAmrairaruNaH" - which means HE is red

and copper colored while commenting on sarvAruNA. There are

innumerable references for ambAL being red, but Acharya quotes Sri

Rudram indicating that Shiva is red and hence she is red.

 

 

I never used to visualize ardhanArIshvara during japa, but this

aruNA varNa dhyAnam with both parameshvar and ambaaL is even more

pleasing when we recite 'japA kusuma bhAsurAm japavidhau smaret'.

 

 

In my humble opinion, though we could read and re-read a shloka and

ponder over semantics and alankArA, It takes a mahatma to indicate

the real bhava in it. This anubhava spUrthi is shiva dampati

themselves ('AnandaspuradanubhavAbhyam')

 

 

That is one reason why they insist on learning even a simple hymn

from an elder rather than picking it from a book.

 

 

Ananda suradanubhavAbhyAm namaH iti iyam.

 

Aravind

 

 

 

 

 

 

, Ramesh Srinivasan <ramesh@i...>

wrote:

>

>

> The Theft Committed by AmbA

>

> (...Continued)

>