Guest guest Posted June 14, 2005 Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 Namaste, Just like it is mentioned that the jIva is modified shiva, likewise this cit shakti spoken of below is not different from shiva either. This cit shakti itself is a modification of shiva. That said, there is nothing that can truly veil or pollute(to use your word) shiva. Being the nature of pure prakAsha or shuddha prakAsha, this shiva inturn shines(or appears) as that which appears to veil or modify. Regards , "sri parasukhananda nadha" <sriparasukhanandanadha@r...> wrote: > > Sub: Chidagni kunda sambhoota > > AdaranEya mahAsayAh, > Om chidagni kunda sambhootayai namah. > > In the beginning (of course that was not ever there) when by that time, the three gunAs, sattwa, rajas and thamas were not yet separated, only the Siva was existing as a nonexistent subject. He was then a nameless and formless one and just a sthAnu swaroopa only. In fact he is all knowing sarvajna and all powerful sarvasakthimAn. Among all other sakthis, the chitchakthi occupies the prominent and eternally inseparable status in/with him. She flashed a feeling of I`ness (aham) into Siva`s memory and by that, Siva was subjected to have a desire for something else as a company. > "SivaparAyai namah" > > The moment when the chitchakti has appeared out >to influence Siva, the bindu chakra in the brahmarandhra has formed >shape like a small spot to denote as `siva sakthi sAmarasya', but as >Siva was polluted with a desire in his mind , forgetting that he himself is all affluent, had to fall down to the state of an ordinary human being > > "JnAninAmapi chEthAmsi dEvI bhagavatE hi sA > mOhAya mahAmAyA prayacchathi" > > Soon after the desire erupted in Siva`s mind, the chitchakti showed >in front of him, like a mirror, his own image only in the form of >external huge universe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 14, 2005 Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 Namaste, Please see shrI Aravind Krishna's comments on the same below /message/252 /message/247 IMHO due to a couple of reasons and points that I will not bring up/or discuss here, I side with shrI Aravind Krishna(if he still holds that view) that it might be better to follow the sahasranAma. Regards , sankara menon <kochu1tz> wrote: > I have had a doubt for sometime. Will somone give some explanation? > > There are two namas in LS. > > "Vishukra praanaharana vaaraahI vIryananditA" and "Mantrinyambaa viracita viShanga vadha toShitA" > > but, according to the puranas dealing with Lalita; it was Mantrini who killed Vishukra and Vaaraahi who killed Vishanga. Am I right? If so why this "mistake"? I am sure this is no "mistake". (The mistake must be in my understanding) because great commentators like Bhaskararaya have not commented on this. Or IF my understanding is right, will someone explain why this exchange in roles? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 14, 2005 Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 Dear Sir: I read with great interest your exposition on LS4. I was struck by a couple of your observations on the Prakasha that is Shiva and would like your explanation. You mention that the Supreme Shiva "desired" and no sooner than that happened did the universe spring forth. This view resonates through the Upanishads as well. Yet you say Shiva existed as a "nonexistent subject" before the Desire. That sounds contradictory to me and I would appreciate your explanation. I guess you mean the Supreme Shiva just Is and is not embodied at that "point in time". Secondly, you mention Shiva became "polluted" with that Desire and He "forgot" Himself. I would dare to say that at no nanosecond does Shiva ever forget who He really Is. Clouds may obscure the sun but the Sun does not change. And unless I have my very sketchy knowledge of Kundalini Yoga all wrong, it is the Mother Kundalini that longs to be united with the Supreme Shiva in the Sahasradala padma and hence the evolution of that Yoga system. The best way to describe this Divine Play would possibly be: Shiva sets the stage for the World to function and then withdraws (like the Director of a movie)to enjoy the unfolding. When He gets "bored" (dare I say) the Mother becomes latent in Him and Existence as we know it is obliterated. Hence, when Shiva "Desired", She, the great Empress becomes the kinetic Energy emerging as it were from the Fire of Consciousness that is Shiva, proceeds with the creation of the various worlds etc etc. This is the way I understand that line. As my spiritual mentor would say: Shiva is Sakthi at rest; Sakthi is Shiva in motion. Comments would be most welcome from everybody. Best regards Ganesh .. , "sri parasukhananda nadha" <sriparasukhanandanadha@r...> wrote: > > Sub: Chidagni kunda sambhoota > > AdaranEya mahAsayAh, > Om chidagni kunda sambhootayai namah. > > In the beginning (of course that was not ever there) when by that time, the three gunAs, sattwa, rajas and thamas were not yet separated, only the Siva was existing as a nonexistent subject. He was then a nameless and formless one and just a sthAnu swaroopa only. In fact he is all knowing sarvajna and all powerful sarvasakthimAn. Among all other sakthis, the chitchakthi occupies the prominent and eternally inseparable status in/with him. She flashed a feeling of I`ness (aham) into Siva`s memory and by that, Siva was subjected to have a desire for something else as a company. > "SivaparAyai namah" > > The moment when the chitchakti has appeared out to influence Siva, the bindu chakra in the brahmarandhra has formed shape like a small spot to denote as `siva sakthi sAmarasya', but as Siva was polluted with a desire in his mind , forgetting that he himself is all affluent, had to fall down to the state of an ordinary human being > > "JnAninAmapi chEthAmsi dEvI bhagavatE hi sA > mOhAya mahAmAyA prayacchathi" > > Soon after the desire erupted in Siva`s mind, the chitchakti showed in front of him, like a mirror, his own image only in the form of external huge universe. > > Every thing happened simultaneously at a time, when the bindu chakra has manifested, the remaining all other charkas also have emerged out spontaneously. > > "sUnyAkAsAd visargAnthat bindu praspanda samvidah > prasrutham viswa laharE sthAnam mAtru trayAthmakam"|| > > The Siva with all his human qualities and weaknesses has fallen dow to the mooladhAra charka and is weeping loudly for the salvation."rOravEthi mahAdEivo martyAgm Aviveisa" > > So long as the chitchakthi is remaining in the bindu charka as the soul and spirit of siva is called "chit". But when it looks out extrovertly towards the universe, it is called "chittam". The chitchakti is so powerful to make all the people to remain extrovertly always and keep them entangled with the worldly fetters for ever. She can also make a few dhErAs to turn their vision inwards introvertly and help him realize his original form (swa swaroopa) so that achieve total liberation. > > That is why, stricken with sympathy for the cries of Siva, she came down all the way and manifested herself in the swAdhisthAna charka as the thinking principle (chitchakthi ie., jnAna sakthi) to enable Siva to realize who he is/was. > > Siva who is the ever existent being (Sat swaroopa/bhuuh) is now taking shelter in the Bhuu thatwa. The chit (GnAna sakthi) is similar to a kind of fire (gnAnAgni) has now occupied the agnimandala swAdhisthAna charka. "chithireva viswa grasana sElatwat vahnih" > > The triangular shaped kulakunda is an agni charka. When it is energized and inflamed by the prAna sakthi and expanded into a six faced vishuva charka, it is called as adhah kundalini. This is a kind of epitome of the human being who is restlessly tottering in the worldly affairs, but searching ways to escape from this unending cycle of births and deaths. This is the first stage for the seeker of liberation. > > swAdhisthAnam is a six peteled lotus like pool or a dip in which the serpent like (because it is living on prAna vaAyu we breath as its diet) pranava coiled round in three and a half twists. This pranava (A,U,Ma and nAda ardha bindu) could be the only means for the salvation for any one. > > The shodasAkshari vidya, which was initiated by the sreeguru, (which was mentioned in my previous mail as sreemat simhAsaneswari) which was described as "pancha pranava dwirEpha nalini" is none other than the five faced Siva himself. Here the pancha pranavaAs are, sreem, hreem, kleem, aim and sowh and the "DwirEphas" are the two `ra kArAs'(agni beejas), hreem and sreem behind the suddha pranava (omkAra), > Om kAra can be taken as the bindu and hreem and sreem are the twin bindus of the visarga, ultimately forming as the "kAma kala", which is the real and only way for the total liberation. > "DOshair na jnAyase hari harAdibhirapyapAra". It is impossible to understand her even by Brahma, Vishnu or Siva so long as they are polluted in their minds. > > Summerising the whole, the chitchakthi which was the thinking faculty of Siva, made Siva himself a subject for a desire and a long for something else and fall down to the muulAdhAra chakra in the status of an ordinary human being. "GnAnam bandhah". But out of mercy upon his miserable condition, she came down all the way to the agnimandala swAdhisthAna kula kunda in the form of the pranava kundalini to remind Siva of his real swa-swarUpa and elevate him up to the brahmarandhra, his real abode. > > Here the chidagni kunda is the kulakunda and the devine mother`s manifestation as kundalini should be taken as the meaning for sambhoota, because she never takes any birth at all. > > Om Aim Hreem sreem kundalinyai namo namah shreem. > Comments if any are humbly accepted. > > sriparasukhanandanadha > > > krishnarao.lanka > (sriparasukhanandanadha) > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 24, 2005 Report Share Posted June 24, 2005 , sankara menon <kochu1tz> wrote: > "Vishukra praanaharana vaaraahI vIryananditA" and "Mantrinyambaa viracita viShanga vadha toShitA" > > but, according to the puranas dealing with Lalita; it was Mantrini who killed Vishukra and Vaaraahi who killed Vishanga. Am I right? If so why this "mistake"? I am sure this is no "mistake". (The mistake must be in my understanding) because great commentators like Bhaskararaya have not commented on this. Or IF my understanding is right, will someone explain why this exchange in roles? There is evidence that the lalitopAkhyAna is a text that has been prone to interpolations and parallel versions may exists. As a result I think variants of it exist which interchange the roles of deities in the great war. The southern brahmANDa purANa version of the LA has vArahI killing viShanga. But the stand-alone LA that we read has vishukra being killed by vArAhi. There are a few other lines of evidence that may support this version. In the mahavArtAli pUja, potriNi is worshipped as the killer of vishukra. The Ayudha section of this pUja also mentions the musala (I am told it is a kind of battering rod) as being used to smash vishukra and the sUryAkSha asuras. However, I have seen the manual for constructing the kirimaNDala with a friend, this also mentions the station of the weapon used to kill viShanga: khaNDyiShyati mahAraNe viShanga nAma dAnavaM | The secret sahasranAmaM of potriNi also has viShanga as being killed by her. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 27, 2006 Report Share Posted March 27, 2006 OM SrIguruH sarva kAraNa BUtA SaktiH. OM SrIman mahA gaNAdhipatayE namaH. Who killed whom? and.. why should 'I' know that? Why should we know that? How we know that?. mantriNi killing visha~gga? Shiva beheading gaNEsha? gajAsura or kIrthimukha taking abode at all dieties, All in all, what IS that means with all these killings in braHmAndA PURanA and other scriptures? Why should Goddess laithA win this war, or any war per se??. Whoever wins war, that has to be goddess lalithA?? In my experience, we fail at one place or the other, if we approach to answer these questions in duality. In non-dualistic, can some learned members elaborate on the identities of various demons that raise internally to a bhakta/sAdhaka? To solve any problem/demon, is to identify them at first, then we can invoke/pray for appropriate god/goddess to conquer demons. Just in case, if we got narrow vision, and cannot see SrIguru engulfing all diiferent gods and goddesses. SrIguru is the one, who actually created and let us know and teach us to pray about - all these gods, including each and every god/goddess. OM aiM hrIM SrIM SrImAtrE namonnamaH SrIM. prasAda. , "rajita_rajvasishth" <rajita_rajvasishth wrote: > > , sankara menon <kochu1tz> wrote: > > > "Vishukra praanaharana vaaraahI vIryananditA" and "Mantrinyambaa > viracita viShanga vadha toShitA" > > > > but, according to the puranas dealing with Lalita; it was Mantrini > who killed Vishukra and Vaaraahi who killed Vishanga. Am I right? If > so why this "mistake"? I am sure this is no "mistake". (The mistake > must be in my understanding) because great commentators like > Bhaskararaya have not commented on this. Or IF my understanding is > right, will someone explain why this exchange in roles? > > There is evidence that the lalitopAkhyAna is a text that has been 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.