Guest guest Posted August 3, 2006 Report Share Posted August 3, 2006 , "ecjensen_us" <ecjensen_us wrote: > > maybe noOne replied because you are "the mirror" you are searching > for? i know for me just reading your post you seemed to bring out > my "true nature." hell, i don't even understand your question. > > > Some thoughts : you've heard of Aneroxia Nervosa. Somebody who is suffering from Aneroxia Nervose, when they look in the mirror, they will see themself as fat and obsese even when the fact is they are skinny and look malnutrition. So my question is: does the mirror projects the truth? Or only projects what your mind wants to see? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 3, 2006 Report Share Posted August 3, 2006 Love is truth. the rest is a reflection of a projection. , "NMadasamy" <ashwini_puralasamy wrote: > > , "ecjensen_us" <ecjensen_us@> > wrote: > > > > maybe noOne replied because you are "the mirror" you are searching > > for? i know for me just reading your post you seemed to bring out > > my "true nature." hell, i don't even understand your question. > > > > > > > > Some thoughts : you've heard of Aneroxia Nervosa. Somebody who is > suffering from Aneroxia Nervose, when they look in the mirror, they > will see themself as fat and obsese even when the fact is they are > skinny and look malnutrition. > > So my question is: does the mirror projects the truth? Or only > projects what your mind wants to see? > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 3, 2006 Report Share Posted August 3, 2006 "So my question is: does the mirror projects the truth? Or only projects what your mind wants to see?" Good question, you are right, The mirror projects for me a very narrow and limited point of view, I think that all I can see in the mirror is the projection of my self. But if i look beyond myself, i see other things appear in the mirror, ... the world. ( Let my eyes be your mirror, look through my eyes as if I were looking out of a mirror, and whatever you see outside, are the false projections of you and your selves...) Thus, let your eyes be my mirror, let me look through your eyes as if i was looking out of a mirror, and whatever i see outside are the false projections of me and myself. as Marc suggests: Let the World be your false Mirror, The People your false Image. You want to see rich people, watch TV. You want to see poor people, read the news. sorry for being ignorant... "Some thoughts : you've heard of Aneroxia Nervosa. Somebody who is suffering from Aneroxia Nervose, when they look in the mirror, they will see themself as fat and obsese even when the fact is they are skinny and look malnutrition." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 4, 2006 Report Share Posted August 4, 2006 Many years ago, my husband and me were invited to participate in a ritual : The marriage of Meenakshi-Sundareswarar. We are suppose to represent the groom side while the chairman of the Temple the bridegroom. I never understood then what is the significant of the ritual.Only now I began to grasp the whole picture that it is actually a symbolic representation of the cosmic marriage of Siva- Parvati. NO wonder then that the wedding and the marriage of Siva and Parvati is celebrated with such rejoicing, not only by poets such as KAlidAsa but by devotees even today, as witnessed at the Minaksi temple in Tamil Nadu. "He can see his own face in it. Only when Siva have seen his own reflection, he remembers of Who he is, and thus remembers Parvati too" and they eventually becomes the reflection of each other. A mirror image of one another. Two mirror facing each other. Brings me to mind the image of Ardhanarishwari/a: the effect of this darpanic process. , "NMadasamy" <ashwini_puralasamy wrote: > > "Dhirendra Pal Singh" <dpal.singh@> wrote: BTW I do love how > a "mirror" has lead to so much of philosophical discussion. This is > very interesting. But then is it only discussion, or can it help me > in "elevating" myself. If it cant then perhaps I should ignore > it.. > > > Well ive received several emails too from members asking me : what > is this mirror they are talking abt? > > I am really not so sure what's lulu is talking abt. The Mirror she > is implying. But that is perhaps im too ignorant. Now as I > understand it, perhaps this Mirror is the same as the Darpana. If > this is so, then I would like to talk abt The Darpana of Parvati. > > The Darpana does not only contain the image but reflects is back and > forth, and it is therefore the darpana embodies a movement. The > Darpana becomes a beautiful example of the idea of unity in > difference. It is only a darpana that can create an initial duality > and yet maintain non-duality. Cognition as I understand it contains > three components : Knowledge, remembrance and differentiation. > > I have seen an Image of Lalitha carrying a mirror in her hand and > have often wondered abt it. Is she looking at herself and thus > admiring her own beauty or is she carrying the image for somebody > else : For Siva? > > I rationalise that perhaps the mirror in the hand of Parvati is not > an object of feminine vanity but rather is it meant for Siva so that > He can see his own face in it. Only when Siva have seen his own > reflection, he remembers of Who he is, and thus remembers Parvati > too. Reflection brings about Self-Awareness. > > Self-Awareness is the first step towards Realization. > > A respected member remind me further : "As Mahesvarananda puts it > beautifully in Maharthamanjari, "He (i.e. Shiva) Himself full of joy > enhanced by the honey of the three corners of his heart, viz ICCHA, > JHANA AND KRIYA, raising up His face to gaze at His own splendor is > called Shakti." > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 5, 2006 Report Share Posted August 5, 2006 On Ardhanarishwari/a: Can't understand Ardhanarishwari idea. Iswaris are by definition "Poorna" nari's. Why just half? Ardhanarishwara does make sense - an Iswara with "ardha" nari. || Namah Shivayai cha Namah Shivaya || NMadasamy <ashwini_puralasamy > wrote: Many years ago, my husband and me were invited to participate in a ritual : The marriage of Meenakshi-Sundareswarar. We are suppose to represent the groom side while the chairman of the Temple the bridegroom. I never understood then what is the significant of the ritual.Only now I began to grasp the whole picture that it is actually a symbolic representation of the cosmic marriage of Siva- Parvati. NO wonder then that the wedding and the marriage of Siva and Parvati is celebrated with such rejoicing, not only by poets such as KAlidAsa but by devotees even today, as witnessed at the Minaksi temple in Tamil Nadu. "He can see his own face in it. Only when Siva have seen his own reflection, he remembers of Who he is, and thus remembers Parvati too" and they eventually becomes the reflection of each other. A mirror image of one another. Two mirror facing each other. Brings me to mind the image of Ardhanarishwari/a: the effect of this darpanic process. , "NMadasamy" <ashwini_puralasamy wrote: > > "Dhirendra Pal Singh" <dpal.singh@> wrote: BTW I do love how > a "mirror" has lead to so much of philosophical discussion. This is > very interesting. But then is it only discussion, or can it help me > in "elevating" myself. If it cant then perhaps I should ignore > it.. > > > Well ive received several emails too from members asking me : what > is this mirror they are talking abt? > > I am really not so sure what's lulu is talking abt. The Mirror she > is implying. But that is perhaps im too ignorant. Now as I > understand it, perhaps this Mirror is the same as the Darpana. If > this is so, then I would like to talk abt The Darpana of Parvati. > > The Darpana does not only contain the image but reflects is back and > forth, and it is therefore the darpana embodies a movement. The > Darpana becomes a beautiful example of the idea of unity in > difference. It is only a darpana that can create an initial duality > and yet maintain non-duality. Cognition as I understand it contains > three components : Knowledge, remembrance and differentiation. > > I have seen an Image of Lalitha carrying a mirror in her hand and > have often wondered abt it. Is she looking at herself and thus > admiring her own beauty or is she carrying the image for somebody > else : For Siva? > > I rationalise that perhaps the mirror in the hand of Parvati is not > an object of feminine vanity but rather is it meant for Siva so that > He can see his own face in it. Only when Siva have seen his own > reflection, he remembers of Who he is, and thus remembers Parvati > too. Reflection brings about Self-Awareness. > > Self-Awareness is the first step towards Realization. > > A respected member remind me further : "As Mahesvarananda puts it > beautifully in Maharthamanjari, "He (i.e. Shiva) Himself full of joy > enhanced by the honey of the three corners of his heart, viz ICCHA, > JHANA AND KRIYA, raising up His face to gaze at His own splendor is > called Shakti." > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 5, 2006 Report Share Posted August 5, 2006 , "Krishnakumar M." <krishna_kumar_m wrote: > > On Ardhanarishwari/a: Can't understand Ardhanarishwari idea. Iswaris are by definition "Poorna" nari's. Why just half? Ardhanarishwara does make sense - an Iswara with "ardha" nari. > > || Namah Shivayai cha Namah Shivaya || > We are shaktas remember. We like to turn everybody into female. So if u have Varaha, we call it Varahi. You call Indra, Indraini for us. Narayana becomes Narayani. So Ardhanarishwara, we call Ardhanarishwari. Once we were doing this Goddess of the week series and have run out of ideas of who to put. One of our senior said : lets put so and so { i forgot the name of the devi]. But I said we do not have the pic of Her. He remarked : She look like Visnu, So lets put Visnu there and give him the breasts. That will make him look very feminine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 7, 2006 Report Share Posted August 7, 2006 Namaste! I think you missed the point. With my limited knowledge of Sanskrit, Ardhanariswari means "a female who is half female". Not much meaningful. There is more meaning if you say "a male who is half female" (Ardha nariswara in Sanskrit) or "a female who is half male" (not sure if this meaning can be got with legal Sanskrit constructions using these words - ardha, nari, iswara or iswari). BTW, I do not think there is any word called "Indraini", while Indrani is ok. Varahi, Narayani are all correct. Also, I am not sure if giving breasts to Vishnu will make him a Devi. I beleive to make a Deva or Devi image there are good iconographic rules to be obeyed. Playing with Photoshop is unlikely to make a Narayani out of Narayana. Just my 2c worth! ||om tat sat|| NMadasamy <ashwini_puralasamy > wrote: , "Krishnakumar M." <krishna_kumar_m wrote: > > On Ardhanarishwari/a: Can't understand Ardhanarishwari idea. Iswaris are by definition "Poorna" nari's. Why just half? Ardhanarishwara does make sense - an Iswara with "ardha" nari. > > || Namah Shivayai cha Namah Shivaya || > We are shaktas remember. We like to turn everybody into female. So if u have Varaha, we call it Varahi. You call Indra, Indraini for us. Narayana becomes Narayani. So Ardhanarishwara, we call Ardhanarishwari. Once we were doing this Goddess of the week series and have run out of ideas of who to put. One of our senior said : lets put so and so { i forgot the name of the devi]. But I said we do not have the pic of Her. He remarked : She look like Visnu, So lets put Visnu there and give him the breasts. That will make him look very feminine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 7, 2006 Report Share Posted August 7, 2006 , "Krishnakumar M." <krishna_kumar_m wrote: > > Namaste! > > I think you missed the point. With my limited knowledge of Sanskrit, Ardhanariswari means "a female who is half female". Not much meaningful. There is more meaning if you say "a male who is half female" (Ardha nariswara in Sanskrit) or "a female who is half male" (not sure if this meaning can be got with legal Sanskrit constructions using these words - ardha, nari, iswara or iswari). Im not making any point actually. Worst still my knowledge of sanskrit is Zero actually. > > BTW, I do not think there is any word called "Indraini", while Indrani is ok. Varahi, Narayani are all correct. yes! I am aware. There's a typo error. Thank you for pointing it out for me. > > Also, I am not sure if giving breasts to Vishnu will make him a Devi. I beleive to make a Deva or Devi image there are good iconographic rules to be obeyed. Playing with Photoshop is unlikely to make a Narayani out of Narayana. No it didnt work actually, that is why we didnt put it up. > > Just my 2c worth! Im a bankrupt. So I cannot give any cents at all. Sorry 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.