From skanda bhAShya - A Note:

[Guest guest]

It is very well known from the existing commentaries that all the

mantras from rudraM and elsewhere have a deeper philosophical meaning.

 

Only the external names and forms are given attention in this post

intentionally - just for the fun of it.

 

It is not intended to make readers beleive that there is a rudra and

a rudra chaNDika somewhere in the sky or in some loka holding real

bows and arrows...

 

Sadhakas are better off dwelling on the hidden meanings.

 

Regards

 

 

, "Satish" <satisharigela> wrote:

>

> In the 6 th anuvAka for the 5 th and 6 th names( Please refer

> elsewhere for the actual mantras)..

>

> skanda - the spear wielding child War-God/Lord says

>

> - madhye prasiddhAya ca..

>

> lIlA shaishava dhAriNe nama idaM -

>

> Prostrations to you whose existence is well known in the intervening

> period( i.e the time period after the universe came into existence

and

> before its dissolution - In the previous shloka, he is praised as

> existing before the universe and also after the end of the

universe.)

>

> and also (prostrations) to one who "assume childhood for sport".

>

> Assuming childhood for sport: Compare that with bAlA, lIlA vinodinI

of

> lalitA sahasranAma.

>

> Much is said in this commentary about the weapons of rudra,

especially

> His bow. Elsewhere it is said that rudra chaNDikA or rudra chAmuNDA

is

> adorned with a beautiful bow which is adorned with peacock feathers.

>

> This and many more instances will be encountered which tell much

about

> the similarity between devI and shiva.

>

> sa.

>

[Guest guest]

>From :-- sriparasukhanandanadha

November 9, 2005

Subject :- : From skanda bhAShya - A Note:

 

Priya bandhu Satish mahAsay,

>Sadhakas are better off dwelling on the hidden meanings.

 

If you say “off the hidden meaning”, I differ

with you. The sAdhana of any one itself, is to elicit the hidden meanings of

any name or mantra in several and different meanings in it. A mantra is called

“satapatha” and “satavraja”. Even there are innumerable meaning in a mantra or

a name, the central Idea would be the same and unchangeable always.

“tadartHa bHavanam vA”. It is said by eliciting different meanings for a single

name or mantra, will also become a kind of japa.

 

Before attempting to read any philosophical

scriptures, it is always advised that one must undergo proper initiation and

guidance under a qualified guru. Otherwise you will be subjected to great

confusion in understanding the scriptures.

 

For example, in puruSha sUkta it is said,

“hriischa laxmiisch te patnyou” If Gowri and Laxmi are the wives of PuruSha,

who are the wives of Siva and Vishnu? It is also said that the names of the two

wives of brahmachAri ganesh as “~riddhi” and “buddhi” (~riddhi is laxmi and

buddhi is saraswati). What about Vishnu and Brahma? In another instance it is

said “ pAhi pAvani haripriyE SivE”. Is pArvati the wife of ViShnu?

“brahmAKhyam dadatii hari priyatamA sA BhAratii pAtu nah” Is it not ridiculous

to say BhArati is the lover of ViShnu?

 

I am not an authority on scriptures, but I can tell

you, that one and all of the hindu gods are different forms of only one:,and

represent the same single individual; which as you said,

>

> ” It is not intended to make readers beleive that there is a rudra and

a rudra chaNDika somewhere in the sky or in some loka holding real

bows and arrows “.

I agree with you, but we must find out about whom and why all this stuff is

intended? What is that significance to hold those wepons in hands?

 

After all all the japa, sAdhana, nAmavali reciting,

and all the swAdHyAya is intended to know thyself only. That is why the guru is

called “swarUpa nirUpana hEtuh”. All the dEvAs, dEvatAs and all the universe is

nothing but your own extention. Ony to realize this fact, you are memorizing

so many forms of your own births. If you make fun of any of these, it means

that you are ridiculing your self.

 

Please excuse me if I have in any way hurt your

feelings which is not my intention at all.

 

sriparasukhanandanadha

 

 

 

 

 

On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 wrote :

>

>There are 2 messages in this issue.

>

>Topics in this digest:

>

> 1. Re: From skanda bhAShya - A Note:

> "Satish" <satisharigela

> 2. Re: Re: From skanda bhAShya - A Note:

> Ravisankar Mayavaram <abhayambika

>