Guest guest Posted June 12, 2009 Report Share Posted June 12, 2009 Dear Visti-ji, This is a beautiful explanation. Regards Souvik sohamsa , Visti Larsen <visti wrote: > > ??? ??? ????? > Dear Narasimha, Sarbani, Arpad et. al, Namaskar. > In the entire discussion on Mahavidya and Grahas, I wished to point out > that the simplicity with which Narasimha pointed out the Mahavidya and > their equivalents was lacking proper comprehension of the concept of > Graha and Devata. > > Two points I saw were mainly lacking. One philosophical and one Jyotish > point. > > Firstly, Narasimha, you equate Mahavidya with: 'she who which helps > overcome duality'. I didn't like this explanation yet I took it to > myself to ask some Sadhakas who have practised Mahavidya mantras for the > last couple of years. None of them agreed to this and they pointed out > that if God is both dual and non-dual then it is only that the Mahavidya > is overcoming our concept of duality or non-duality, whichever is > stronger in us. This made me understand that your statement is solely in > the eyes of the beholder... in this case you or the one who told you this. > My next point is linked to this. > > Secondly, Narasimha, the means through which you linked the Mahavidya to > the Graha is very far away from any way that I have seen Grahas and > Devata linked. Lets take something simple, i.e. Why is Sun equated to > Shiva? Really Sun is not Shiva, how can we say that the cooling and > soothing Shiva mantras are like that hot hot Sun? Impossible really. At > most you can say that Agni is the closest equivalent to the Sun or > Suryadeva himself. In truth we are all taught that in the Pancha Devata > puja that Shiva purifies and balances the Vayu Tattva and therefore also > symbolises the strength of the Maruts which he is always so closely > linked to in the Puranas. Because of this some astrologers TEND to > equate Shiva with Shani as he is able to overcome the worst > Vaata-disturbances, calm the mind and also remove all fears and sorrow, > but that doesn't mean that Shiva is Shani but does have the power to > overcome the Tattva that Shani represents. This by no means implies that > we can prescribe Shiva mantras for all Shani problems, not at all. Nor > does it mean that Rudraksha is advised by the Rishis for all Devata > represented by Surya, far from it. > So again, how did Shiva get equated with Surya when we came to the Graha > level? It is because Shiva is able to enlighten the self of its true > identity and since the Sun represents this self or Atma as an individual > (vayu causes separation), Shiva SHOULD be worshipped to correct this > main issue with the self. Its good for you to worship Shiva to overcome > these issues with (non)duality. > You know this, so why didn't you think in similar terms with the > Mahavidya? i.e. What is the purpose of the Mahavidya and what is the > Mother really doing to us? > > You could have stuck to iconography (sva/lagna-approach) of the > Mahavidya and then surely gone wrong but at least come to something > useful. I.e. Rahu represents the female widower and hence Dhumavati > SHOULD be represented by Rahu, whilst Ketu represents the one depicted > without a head one and therefore SHOULD at a very base level be > represented by Ketu. Again note that we are sticking to iconography here. > But, we are not looking for Graha-representation as this cannot be > within the concept of Mahavidya. Mahavidya implies at its root that > there is some vidya and some a-vidya and the Mahavidya is giving > complete knowledge of all of these and also correcting wrong vidya > (another way of looking at a-vidya). > In the first year of Jaimini Sutras (feel free to listen to it online) > we are taught that the concept of Avidya is linked to Badhaka, a > principle enforced by the words of Harihara, author of Prasna Marga. > Using this understanding, principally Ketu is corrected by the Mahavidya > whose iconography resembles Rahu, and therefore only Dhumavati is > worshipped to overcome the A-vidya of Ketu. This concept was revealed to > a select few of us in Vineland, New Jersey in the summer of 2003. > Similarly, you will hear statements such as, the worship of Tarini makes > one the best student (Mercury), and the worship of Tripurasundari makes > one able to continue the Sampradaya (Jupiter), and therefore ALL > traditions of India stay alive due to the worship of Sri Tripurasundari. > Yet, in practice Tripurasundari is advised to correct the faults of > Mercury and Tarini is worshipped to correct the faults of Jupiter, and > thereby enable the relationship of the teacher and student to be the > best... again see that Mercury and Jupiter are natural Badhaka's to each > other in the charts. > This implies that Mahavidya is really a means of removing the natural > Badhaka of the Graha as that is the place of A-vidya of that Graha. We > affectionately say that Tarini is the Mother of Jupiter and that Tripura > is the Mother if Mercury... but is not Mercury. > > Maharishi Vashishta, father of Shakta and grandfather of Maharishi > Parashara, worshipped Sri Tarini Devi for thousands of years, as > described in the Tara Tantra, to attain the fruit of good children. He > had suffered on account of the demise of his son Shakta, and the direct > lineage was broken. It was because of Tara's blessing that he attained > an illustrious progeny which we today consider the fountain head of all > knowledge of spirituality. So, should one question the age and practice > of the Mahavidya's, we can go very very far back. This further confirms > that Sri Tarini is worshipped to correct the flaws in Jupiter and is > therefore appropriately praised as Sri Kuleshvari by many. Further, in > practice ladies and men with great blockages and doshas with respect to > children have seen all such problems removed through the worship of Sri > Tarini confirming this. > > Should we then go into how the Grahas are linked to Jyotirlingas or even > Avataras? Point is that simple justification will not suffice to > describe the Devata's and brings the lists given without such > consideration to much question. > > I hope my points will bring clarity to teachers and students alike. > Yours sincerely, Visti Larsen > ---------- > Jyotish Guru (Vedic Astrologer) > www: http://srigaruda.com > @: visti > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Namaste None of them agreed to this and they pointed out that if God is both dual and non-dual then it is only that the Mahavidya is overcoming our concept of duality or non-duality, whichever is stronger in us. I can comment on the philosophical point raised in the mail - and I firmly disgree to this. Someone, anyone, who resides in the state of perfect non-duality is already beyond everything, EVERYTHING. Deities, rituals etc etc. So the idea of Mahavidya or anyone helping to overcome non-duality really does not arise, because there is nothing to overcome beyond that. That itself is the final goal, theoritically at least. Few every in the history of sadhaks have touched that state of nonduality being in this physical plane. It is such an idea that it cannot be even talked about because talking involves the mind and this, as they say, is beyond the mind. As long as the mind remains duality remains, once the mind is transcended entirely, it is non dual. So therefore, all these discussion of correlation etc etc and any deity for that matter is firmly in the relam of duality. -Regards Rajarshi The upsurge (of consciousness) is Bhairava - Shiva Sutra--- On Fri, 12/6/09, Visti Larsen <visti wrote: Visti Larsen <visti[Om Krishna Guru] Mahavidya, Devata and Graha , sohamsa , jaiminisutra , jaiminiupadesa Date: Friday, 12 June, 2009, 3:14 AM हरे राम कृषà¥à¤£Dear Narasimha, Sarbani, Arpad et. al, Namaskar.In the entire discussion on Mahavidya and Grahas, I wished to point out that the simplicity with which Narasimha pointed out the Mahavidya and their equivalents was lacking proper comprehension of the concept of Graha and Devata.Two points I saw were mainly lacking. One philosophical and one Jyotish point.Firstly, Narasimha, you equate Mahavidya with: 'she who which helps overcome duality'. I didn't like this explanation yet I took it to myself to ask some Sadhakas who have practised Mahavidya mantras for the last couple of years. None of them agreed to this and they pointed out that if God is both dual and non-dual then it is only that the Mahavidya is overcoming our concept of duality or non-duality, whichever is stronger in us. This made me understand that your statement is solely in the eyes of the beholder... in this case you or the one who told you this.My next point is linked to this.Secondly, Narasimha, the means through which you linked the Mahavidya to the Graha is very far away from any way that I have seen Grahas and Devata linked. Lets take something simple, i.e. Why is Sun equated to Shiva? Really Sun is not Shiva, how can we say that the cooling and soothing Shiva mantras are like that hot hot Sun? Impossible really. At most you can say that Agni is the closest equivalent to the Sun or Suryadeva himself. In truth we are all taught that in the Pancha Devata puja that Shiva purifies and balances the Vayu Tattva and therefore also symbolises the strength of the Maruts which he is always so closely linked to in the Puranas. Because of this some astrologers TEND to equate Shiva with Shani as he is able to overcome the worst Vaata-disturbances, calm the mind and also remove all fears and sorrow, but that doesn't mean that Shiva is Shani but does have the power to overcome the Tattva that Shani represents. This by no means implies that we can prescribe Shiva mantras for all Shani problems, not at all. Nor does it mean that Rudraksha is advised by the Rishis for all Devata represented by Surya, far from it.So again, how did Shiva get equated with Surya when we came to the Graha level? It is because Shiva is able to enlighten the self of its true identity and since the Sun represents this self or Atma as an individual (vayu causes separation), Shiva SHOULD be worshipped to correct this main issue with the self. Its good for you to worship Shiva to overcome these issues with (non)duality.You know this, so why didn't you think in similar terms with the Mahavidya? i.e. What is the purpose of the Mahavidya and what is the Mother really doing to us?You could have stuck to iconography (sva/lagna-approach ) of the Mahavidya and then surely gone wrong but at least come to something useful. I.e. Rahu represents the female widower and hence Dhumavati SHOULD be represented by Rahu, whilst Ketu represents the one depicted without a head one and therefore SHOULD at a very base level be represented by Ketu. Again note that we are sticking to iconography here.But, we are not looking for Graha-representatio n as this cannot be within the concept of Mahavidya. Mahavidya implies at its root that there is some vidya and some a-vidya and the Mahavidya is giving complete knowledge of all of these and also correcting wrong vidya (another way of looking at a-vidya). In the first year of Jaimini Sutras (feel free to listen to it online) we are taught that the concept of Avidya is linked to Badhaka, a principle enforced by the words of Harihara, author of Prasna Marga. Using this understanding, principally Ketu is corrected by the Mahavidya whose iconography resembles Rahu, and therefore only Dhumavati is worshipped to overcome the A-vidya of Ketu. This concept was revealed to a select few of us in Vineland, New Jersey in the summer of 2003.Similarly, you will hear statements such as, the worship of Tarini makes one the best student (Mercury), and the worship of Tripurasundari makes one able to continue the Sampradaya (Jupiter), and therefore ALL traditions of India stay alive due to the worship of Sri Tripurasundari. Yet, in practice Tripurasundari is advised to correct the faults of Mercury and Tarini is worshipped to correct the faults of Jupiter, and thereby enable the relationship of the teacher and student to be the best... again see that Mercury and Jupiter are natural Badhaka's to each other in the charts.This implies that Mahavidya is really a means of removing the natural Badhaka of the Graha as that is the place of A-vidya of that Graha. We affectionately say that Tarini is the Mother of Jupiter and that Tripura is the Mother if Mercury... but is not Mercury.Maharishi Vashishta, father of Shakta and grandfather of Maharishi Parashara, worshipped Sri Tarini Devi for thousands of years, as described in the Tara Tantra, to attain the fruit of good children. He had suffered on account of the demise of his son Shakta, and the direct lineage was broken. It was because of Tara's blessing that he attained an illustrious progeny which we today consider the fountain head of all knowledge of spirituality. So, should one question the age and practice of the Mahavidya's, we can go very very far back. This further confirms that Sri Tarini is worshipped to correct the flaws in Jupiter and is therefore appropriately praised as Sri Kuleshvari by many. Further, in practice ladies and men with great blockages and doshas with respect to children have seen all such problems removed through the worship of Sri Tarini confirming this.Should we then go into how the Grahas are linked to Jyotirlingas or even Avataras? Point is that simple justification will not suffice to describe the Devata's and brings the lists given without such consideration to much question.I hope my points will bring clarity to teachers and students alike.Yours sincerely, Visti Larsen------------ --------- --------- --------- ----Jyotish Guru (Vedic Astrologer) www: http://srigaruda. com@: visti (AT) srigaruda (DOT) com Explore and discover exciting holidays and getaways with India Travel Click here! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Hi Visti, "None of them agreed to this and they pointed out that if if God is both dual and non-dual then it is only that the Mahavidya is overcoming our concept of duality or non-duality, whichever is stronger in us." Does it mean that if duality is stronger in us Mother will try to 'overcome' that means guide us to non duality and vice versa ? Please elaborate. Thanks. , Visti Larsen <visti wrote:>> ??? ??? ?????> Dear Narasimha, Sarbani, Arpad et. al, Namaskar.> In the entire discussion on Mahavidya and Grahas, I wished to point out > that the simplicity with which Narasimha pointed out the Mahavidya and > their equivalents was lacking proper comprehension of the concept of > Graha and Devata.> > Two points I saw were mainly lacking. One philosophical and one Jyotish > point.> > Firstly, Narasimha, you equate Mahavidya with: 'she who which helps > overcome duality'. I didn't like this explanation yet I took it to > myself to ask some Sadhakas who have practised Mahavidya mantras for the > last couple of years. None of them agreed to this and they pointed out > that if God is both dual and non-dual then it is only that the Mahavidya > is overcoming our concept of duality or non-duality, whichever is > stronger in us. This made me understand that your statement is solely in > the eyes of the beholder... in this case you or the one who told you this.> My next point is linked to this.> > Secondly, Narasimha, the means through which you linked the Mahavidya to > the Graha is very far away from any way that I have seen Grahas and > Devata linked. Lets take something simple, i.e. Why is Sun equated to > Shiva? Really Sun is not Shiva, how can we say that the cooling and > soothing Shiva mantras are like that hot hot Sun? Impossible really. At > most you can say that Agni is the closest equivalent to the Sun or > Suryadeva himself. In truth we are all taught that in the Pancha Devata > puja that Shiva purifies and balances the Vayu Tattva and therefore also > symbolises the strength of the Maruts which he is always so closely > linked to in the Puranas. Because of this some astrologers TEND to > equate Shiva with Shani as he is able to overcome the worst > Vaata-disturbances, calm the mind and also remove all fears and sorrow, > but that doesn't mean that Shiva is Shani but does have the power to > overcome the Tattva that Shani represents. This by no means implies that > we can prescribe Shiva mantras for all Shani problems, not at all. Nor > does it mean that Rudraksha is advised by the Rishis for all Devata > represented by Surya, far from it.> So again, how did Shiva get equated with Surya when we came to the Graha > level? It is because Shiva is able to enlighten the self of its true > identity and since the Sun represents this self or Atma as an individual > (vayu causes separation), Shiva SHOULD be worshipped to correct this > main issue with the self. Its good for you to worship Shiva to overcome > these issues with (non)duality.> You know this, so why didn't you think in similar terms with the > Mahavidya? i.e. What is the purpose of the Mahavidya and what is the > Mother really doing to us?> > You could have stuck to iconography (sva/lagna-approach) of the > Mahavidya and then surely gone wrong but at least come to something > useful. I.e. Rahu represents the female widower and hence Dhumavati > SHOULD be represented by Rahu, whilst Ketu represents the one depicted > without a head one and therefore SHOULD at a very base level be > represented by Ketu. Again note that we are sticking to iconography here.> But, we are not looking for Graha-representation as this cannot be > within the concept of Mahavidya. Mahavidya implies at its root that > there is some vidya and some a-vidya and the Mahavidya is giving > complete knowledge of all of these and also correcting wrong vidya > (another way of looking at a-vidya).> In the first year of Jaimini Sutras (feel free to listen to it online) > we are taught that the concept of Avidya is linked to Badhaka, a > principle enforced by the words of Harihara, author of Prasna Marga. > Using this understanding, principally Ketu is corrected by the Mahavidya > whose iconography resembles Rahu, and therefore only Dhumavati is > worshipped to overcome the A-vidya of Ketu. This concept was revealed to > a select few of us in Vineland, New Jersey in the summer of 2003.> Similarly, you will hear statements such as, the worship of Tarini makes > one the best student (Mercury), and the worship of Tripurasundari makes > one able to continue the Sampradaya (Jupiter), and therefore ALL > traditions of India stay alive due to the worship of Sri Tripurasundari. > Yet, in practice Tripurasundari is advised to correct the faults of > Mercury and Tarini is worshipped to correct the faults of Jupiter, and > thereby enable the relationship of the teacher and student to be the > best... again see that Mercury and Jupiter are natural Badhaka's to each > other in the charts.> This implies that Mahavidya is really a means of removing the natural > Badhaka of the Graha as that is the place of A-vidya of that Graha. We > affectionately say that Tarini is the Mother of Jupiter and that Tripura > is the Mother if Mercury... but is not Mercury.> > Maharishi Vashishta, father of Shakta and grandfather of Maharishi > Parashara, worshipped Sri Tarini Devi for thousands of years, as > described in the Tara Tantra, to attain the fruit of good children. He > had suffered on account of the demise of his son Shakta, and the direct > lineage was broken. It was because of Tara's blessing that he attained > an illustrious progeny which we today consider the fountain head of all > knowledge of spirituality. So, should one question the age and practice > of the Mahavidya's, we can go very very far back. This further confirms > that Sri Tarini is worshipped to correct the flaws in Jupiter and is > therefore appropriately praised as Sri Kuleshvari by many. Further, in > practice ladies and men with great blockages and doshas with respect to > children have seen all such problems removed through the worship of Sri > Tarini confirming this.> > Should we then go into how the Grahas are linked to Jyotirlingas or even > Avataras? Point is that simple justification will not suffice to > describe the Devata's and brings the lists given without such > consideration to much question.> > I hope my points will bring clarity to teachers and students alike.> Yours sincerely, Visti Larsen> ----------> Jyotish Guru (Vedic Astrologer)> www: http://srigaruda.com> @: visti Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 हरे राम कृषà¥à¤£ Dear Rajarshi, Namaskar. I will not go deep into the concepts of dvaita and advaita but say this: When both these philosophies exist strongly as means to approach God, we cannot say that one is more accurate than the other. Both philosophies have very strong stand points. Its obvious that you believe truly in the Advaita philosophy. Its good that you recognise this in yourself. In the first lesson on the Jaimini Sutras we are taught that everyone believes either in Dvaita and Advaita in truth. And further that we only reach God once we realise both approaches... not just intellectualise them. This is something a bit new and was what Sri Chaitanya was teaching, namely the Dvaita-Advaita approach. Some say this is akin to the teachings of Vyasa and Jaimini. I hope this clarifies. Yours sincerely, Visti Larsen ---------- Jyotish Guru (Vedic Astrologer) www: http://srigaruda.com @: visti rajarshi nandy skrev: Namaste  None of them agreed to this and they pointed out that if God is both dual and non-dual then it is only that the Mahavidya is overcoming our concept of duality or non-duality, whichever is stronger in us.   I can comment on the philosophical point raised in the mail - and I firmly disgree to this. Someone, anyone, who resides in the state of perfect non-duality is already beyond everything, EVERYTHING. Deities, rituals etc etc. So the idea of Mahavidya or anyone helping to overcome non-duality really does not arise, because there is nothing to overcome beyond that. That itself is the final goal, theoritically at least. Few every in the history of sadhaks have touched that state of nonduality being in this physical plane. It is such an idea that it cannot be even talked about because talking involves the mind and this, as they say, is beyond the mind. As long as the mind remains duality remains, once the mind is transcended entirely, it is non dual. So therefore, all these discussion of correlation etc etc and any deity for that matter is firmly in the relam of duality.  -Regards  Rajarshi     The upsurge (of consciousness) is Bhairava - Shiva Sutra --- On Fri, 12/6/09, Visti Larsen <visti (AT) srigaruda (DOT) com> wrote: Visti Larsen <visti (AT) srigaruda (DOT) com> [Om Krishna Guru] Mahavidya, Devata and Graha , sohamsa , jaiminisutra , jaiminiupadesa Friday, 12 June, 2009, 3:14 AM हरे राम कृषà¥à¤£ Dear Narasimha, Sarbani, Arpad et. al, Namaskar. In the entire discussion on Mahavidya and Grahas, I wished to point out that the simplicity with which Narasimha pointed out the Mahavidya and their equivalents was lacking proper comprehension of the concept of Graha and Devata. Two points I saw were mainly lacking. One philosophical and one Jyotish point. Firstly, Narasimha, you equate Mahavidya with: 'she who which helps overcome duality'. I didn't like this explanation yet I took it to myself to ask some Sadhakas who have practised Mahavidya mantras for the last couple of years. None of them agreed to this and they pointed out that if God is both dual and non-dual then it is only that the Mahavidya is overcoming our concept of duality or non-duality, whichever is stronger in us. This made me understand that your statement is solely in the eyes of the beholder... in this case you or the one who told you this. My next point is linked to this. Secondly, Narasimha, the means through which you linked the Mahavidya to the Graha is very far away from any way that I have seen Grahas and Devata linked. Lets take something simple, i.e. Why is Sun equated to Shiva? Really Sun is not Shiva, how can we say that the cooling and soothing Shiva mantras are like that hot hot Sun? Impossible really. At most you can say that Agni is the closest equivalent to the Sun or Suryadeva himself. In truth we are all taught that in the Pancha Devata puja that Shiva purifies and balances the Vayu Tattva and therefore also symbolises the strength of the Maruts which he is always so closely linked to in the Puranas. Because of this some astrologers TEND to equate Shiva with Shani as he is able to overcome the worst Vaata-disturbances, calm the mind and also remove all fears and sorrow, but that doesn't mean that Shiva is Shani but does have the power to overcome the Tattva that Shani represents. This by no means implies that we can prescribe Shiva mantras for all Shani problems, not at all. Nor does it mean that Rudraksha is advised by the Rishis for all Devata represented by Surya, far from it. So again, how did Shiva get equated with Surya when we came to the Graha level? It is because Shiva is able to enlighten the self of its true identity and since the Sun represents this self or Atma as an individual (vayu causes separation), Shiva SHOULD be worshipped to correct this main issue with the self. Its good for you to worship Shiva to overcome these issues with (non)duality. You know this, so why didn't you think in similar terms with the Mahavidya? i.e. What is the purpose of the Mahavidya and what is the Mother really doing to us? You could have stuck to iconography (sva/lagna-approach ) of the Mahavidya and then surely gone wrong but at least come to something useful. I.e. Rahu represents the female widower and hence Dhumavati SHOULD be represented by Rahu, whilst Ketu represents the one depicted without a head one and therefore SHOULD at a very base level be represented by Ketu. Again note that we are sticking to iconography here. But, we are not looking for Graha-representatio n as this cannot be within the concept of Mahavidya. Mahavidya implies at its root that there is some vidya and some a-vidya and the Mahavidya is giving complete knowledge of all of these and also correcting wrong vidya (another way of looking at a-vidya). In the first year of Jaimini Sutras (feel free to listen to it online) we are taught that the concept of Avidya is linked to Badhaka, a principle enforced by the words of Harihara, author of Prasna Marga. Using this understanding, principally Ketu is corrected by the Mahavidya whose iconography resembles Rahu, and therefore only Dhumavati is worshipped to overcome the A-vidya of Ketu. This concept was revealed to a select few of us in Vineland, New Jersey in the summer of 2003. Similarly, you will hear statements such as, the worship of Tarini makes one the best student (Mercury), and the worship of Tripurasundari makes one able to continue the Sampradaya (Jupiter), and therefore ALL traditions of India stay alive due to the worship of Sri Tripurasundari. Yet, in practice Tripurasundari is advised to correct the faults of Mercury and Tarini is worshipped to correct the faults of Jupiter, and thereby enable the relationship of the teacher and student to be the best... again see that Mercury and Jupiter are natural Badhaka's to each other in the charts. This implies that Mahavidya is really a means of removing the natural Badhaka of the Graha as that is the place of A-vidya of that Graha. We affectionately say that Tarini is the Mother of Jupiter and that Tripura is the Mother if Mercury... but is not Mercury. Maharishi Vashishta, father of Shakta and grandfather of Maharishi Parashara, worshipped Sri Tarini Devi for thousands of years, as described in the Tara Tantra, to attain the fruit of good children. He had suffered on account of the demise of his son Shakta, and the direct lineage was broken. It was because of Tara's blessing that he attained an illustrious progeny which we today consider the fountain head of all knowledge of spirituality. So, should one question the age and practice of the Mahavidya's, we can go very very far back. This further confirms that Sri Tarini is worshipped to correct the flaws in Jupiter and is therefore appropriately praised as Sri Kuleshvari by many. Further, in practice ladies and men with great blockages and doshas with respect to children have seen all such problems removed through the worship of Sri Tarini confirming this. Should we then go into how the Grahas are linked to Jyotirlingas or even Avataras? Point is that simple justification will not suffice to describe the Devata's and brings the lists given without such consideration to much question. I hope my points will bring clarity to teachers and students alike. Yours sincerely, Visti Larsen ------------ --------- --------- --------- ---- Jyotish Guru (Vedic Astrologer) www: http://srigaruda. com @: visti (AT) srigaruda (DOT) com Explore and discover exciting holidays and getaways with India Travel Click here! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 हरे राम कृष्ण Dear Ray, Namaskar. Maybe. That really depends on the worshipper. Usually the Mother makes you a better human being before making you a better sadhaka. Does that not sound but natural? Yours sincerely, Visti Larsen ---------- Jyotish Guru (Vedic Astrologer) www: http://srigaruda.com @: visti ray.siya1 skrev: Hi Visti, "None of them agreed to this and they pointed out that if if God is both dual and non-dual then it is only that the Mahavidya is overcoming our concept of duality or non-duality, whichever is stronger in us." Does it mean that if duality is stronger in us Mother will try to 'overcome' that means guide us to non duality and vice versa ? Please elaborate. Thanks. , Visti Larsen <visti wrote: > > ??? ??? ????? > Dear Narasimha, Sarbani, Arpad et. al, Namaskar. > In the entire discussion on Mahavidya and Grahas, I wished to point out > that the simplicity with which Narasimha pointed out the Mahavidya and > their equivalents was lacking proper comprehension of the concept of > Graha and Devata. > > Two points I saw were mainly lacking. One philosophical and one Jyotish > point. > > Firstly, Narasimha, you equate Mahavidya with: 'she who which helps > overcome duality'. I didn't like this explanation yet I took it to > myself to ask some Sadhakas who have practised Mahavidya mantras for the > last couple of years. None of them agreed to this and they pointed out > that if God is both dual and non-dual then it is only that the Mahavidya > is overcoming our concept o f duality or non-duality, whichever is > stronger in us. This made me understand that your statement is solely in > the eyes of the beholder... in this case you or the one who told you this. > My next point is linked to this. > > Secondly, Narasimha, the means through which you linked the Mahavidya to > the Graha is very far away from any way that I have seen Grahas and > Devata linked. Lets take something simple, i.e. Why is Sun equated to > Shiva? Really Sun is not Shiva, how can we say that the cooling and > soothing Shiva mantras are like that hot hot Sun? Impossible really. At > most you can say that Agni is the closest equivalent to the Sun or > Suryadeva himself. In truth we are all taught that in the Pancha Devata > puja that Shiva purifies and balances the Vayu Tattva and therefore also > symbolises the strength of the Maruts which he is always so closely > linked to in t he Puranas. Because of this some astrologers TEND to > equate Shiva with Shani as he is able to overcome the worst > Vaata-disturbances, calm the mind and also remove all fears and sorrow, > but that doesn't mean that Shiva is Shani but does have the power to > overcome the Tattva that Shani represents. This by no means implies that > we can prescribe Shiva mantras for all Shani problems, not at all. Nor > does it mean that Rudraksha is advised by the Rishis for all Devata > represented by Surya, far from it. > So again, how did Shiva get equated with Surya when we came to the Graha > level? It is because Shiva is able to enlighten the self of its true > identity and since the Sun represents this self or Atma as an individual > (vayu causes separation), Shiva SHOULD be worshipped to correct this > main issue with the self. Its good for you to worship Shiva to overcome > these issues wit h (non)duality. > You know this, so why didn't you think in similar terms with the > Mahavidya? i.e. What is the purpose of the Mahavidya and what is the > Mother really doing to us? > > You could have stuck to iconography (sva/lagna-approach) of the > Mahavidya and then surely gone wrong but at least come to something > useful. I.e. Rahu represents the female widower and hence Dhumavati > SHOULD be represented by Rahu, whilst Ketu represents the one depicted > without a head one and therefore SHOULD at a very base level be > represented by Ketu. Again note that we are sticking to iconography here. > But, we are not looking for Graha-representation as this cannot be > within the concept of Mahavidya. Mahavidya implies at its root that > there is some vidya and some a-vidya and the Mahavidya is giving > complete knowledge of all of these and also correcting wrong vidya > (another way of looking at a-vidya). > In the first year of Jaimini Sutras (feel free to listen to it online) > we are taught that the concept of Avidya is linked to Badhaka, a > principle enforced by the words of Harihara, author of Prasna Marga. > Using this understanding, principally Ketu is corrected by the Mahavidya > whose iconography resembles Rahu, and therefore only Dhumavati is > worshipped to overcome the A-vidya of Ketu. This concept was revealed to > a select few of us in Vineland, New Jersey in the summer of 2003. > Similarly, you will hear statements such as, the worship of Tarini makes > one the best student (Mercury), and the worship of Tripurasundari makes > one able to continue the Sampradaya (Jupiter), and therefore ALL > traditions of India stay alive due to the worship of Sri Tripurasundari. > Yet, in practice Tripurasundari is advised to correct the faults of & g t; Mercury and Tarini is worshipped to correct the faults of Jupiter, and > thereby enable the relationship of the teacher and student to be the > best... again see that Mercury and Jupiter are natural Badhaka's to each > other in the charts. > This implies that Mahavidya is really a means of removing the natural > Badhaka of the Graha as that is the place of A-vidya of that Graha. We > affectionately say that Tarini is the Mother of Jupiter and that Tripura > is the Mother if Mercury... but is not Mercury. > > Maharishi Vashishta, father of Shakta and grandfather of Maharishi > Parashara, worshipped Sri Tarini Devi for thousands of years, as > described in the Tara Tantra, to attain the fruit of good children. He > had suffered on account of the demise of his son Shakta, and the direct > lineage was broken. It was because of Tara's blessing that he attained > an illustrious proge ny which we today consider the fountain head of all > knowledge of spirituality. So, should one question the age and practice > of the Mahavidya's, we can go very very far back. This further confirms > that Sri Tarini is worshipped to correct the flaws in Jupiter and is > therefore appropriately praised as Sri Kuleshvari by many. Further, in > practice ladies and men with great blockages and doshas with respect to > children have seen all such problems removed through the worship of Sri > Tarini confirming this. > > Should we then go into how the Grahas are linked to Jyotirlingas or even > Avataras? Point is that simple justification will not suffice to > describe the Devata's and brings the lists given without such > consideration to much question. > > I hope my points will bring clarity to teachers and students alike. > Yours sincerely, Visti Larsen > ---------- > Jyotish Guru (Vedic Astrologer) > www: http://srigaruda.com > @: visti > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 Hare Rama Krishna, Dear members, I have found this article on Shri Vidya by Swami Veda Bharati. I had the good fortune to know him when his name was still Pandit Usharbudh Arya.Later, as is well know- he has taken sanyas. Please note how he associates Shri Vidya with the Solar Science. This is entirely in accord with the Kerala Shri Vidya tradition, which maintains that Shri Vidya is THE surya-vijñana "par excellence". (And Matangi Devi to Mercury incidentally) Swamiji also points out the importance of ancient Indian civilization in Bali. Most people are not aware that much of today's Indonesia, still a little less than a thousand years ago was a Hindu-Buddhist kingdom. (actually several of them) On the island of Bali, this spiritual culture has remained since ancient times and is being practiced in unbroken lineages. Somehow, by a seeming Divine miracle, this ancient Hindu culture, which is essentially a spiritual culture, has escaped the "kind" attention of missionaries and the mullahs.(I hope they can withstand the relentless invasion of Australian tourists...anyway, their attention is limited only to the bars and the nightlife on the beaches) So, for the benefit of those who would know more about Shri Vidya, I attach this article. With deep respect to all: AJ What is Sri Vidya? By Swami Veda Bharati Om. Sri. What is Sri Vidya? I shall try to answer this question the only way it can be answered, in a very roundabout way. For, defining is confining. We need to rise beyond the realm of our definitions. It is like the new trend in the computer science known as the fuzzy logic. If you can appreciate fuzzy logic or the theory of chaos, then you would somewhat understand what it means to rise beyond mere apparent definitions and becoming all-conclusive, where the order is not quite as easily visible, quite as simply discernable as it is in the well-defined axioms or axiomatic logic based on S is P, S is not P. It is not so in Sri Vidya, the science of Sri, God's science of the universe. The concept of Sri forms the entire Hindu-buddhist civilization, directly or indirectly, quite often in small segments and powers. However, even in this area of ancient civilizations, with the exception of, say, one in half a billion people, no one really understands what Sri Vidya is because learning Sri Vidya is not like mastering any of the sciences, it is mastering one's own self. It is God's science of the universe, God's science of self-knowledge, that very self-knowledge where God within us also knows Herself. One of the countries where the word Sri is very popular is the Bali Island of Indonesia. The ancient Indian Rishis, sages, founders of sciences, they through whom many sciences were revealed, crossed the seas, and established what is now an ancient civilization. In Bali you would often hear of Bhu Devi or Sri Devi. Bhu Devi means the deity which is the earth. And then Sri Devi, the mother deity of prosperity, no, not prosperity, no, growth, no; ah-- I'll play the modern anthropologist: fertility, now you've got it right! But you haven't. You see, to understand the ancient Eastern sciences, one would have to learn to forget some of the popular definitions given in high circles of learned people in modern systems. Until you can step out of that, you cannot move from the reductionist sciences and schools towards the holistic sciences and schools. It's a question of redefining yourself. And by redefining yourself you will redefine that which your self knows, wishes to know, will know and the seed of that knowledge as well as the substratum of that which we wish to know, or do know, since all these modes of knowing occur within the self. This is one of the very basic principles of Sri Vidya. Talking of the Sri Devi, in every rice field in Bali there is a small shrine to Sri Devi by whose presence the rice grows. Well, obviously it's a fertility cult, so say the experts from the Western civilization which is all-knowing, and knows all about what people think and feel everywhere and how they work out things in a most unscientific way with all these superstitious beliefs such as that some goddess makes the rice grow. Now, for each village there are priests who perform the appropriate rites. There's a chief priest for the whole of Bali Island, who, by his own method of internal coordination, sets up the entire agricultural policy: when the people of different areas should plant, when they should irrigate the fields, when they should reap the crop. In comes the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund and all the great scientists of the world who want to pull these backward people out of their unscientific, superstitious views and institute studies of agricultural patterns and how the agriculture may be improved. As they have done in many, many societies, destroying the entire established fabric and ensuring almost the extinction of a vast diversity of living things through their 'scientific' methods. A few exceptional people are wise and it occurred to them to do a computer model of what would be the best way to really coordinate the planting and the irrigation and the reaping of crops in the right time in all different areas and topographies of the island. It turned out that the models thus prepared coincided with exactly what the chief priests of Sri Devi have been doing in guiding the entire country in matters of agriculture for the last ten or twenty centuries. Leave well alone; the scientists concluded. For details see Stephan Lansing's book, Priests and Programmers: Technologies of Power in the Engineered Landscape of Bali (Princeton University Press, 1991). It is heartening to see that for a change someone took the trouble of trying to comprehend the ways of those who have understood some sciences intrinsically, who know to plan the agriculture of an entire country by intuitive methods. Not guess work, please. Intuition is not guess work. We also need to correct the trend both in the East and West, of equating intuition with guess work. Sri Vidya is the science of intuitive mastery of exact sciences. The way we write Mr., Mrs., Ms., Miss, in the Western countries, the common term used in the communication in India is, for a man, Sriman; for a woman, Srimati; for Ms., Su-Shri and so forth. The Queen of Thailand, Sirikit is actually the sanskrit work Srikirti, the glory of Sri. So all the 850,000,000 Indians carry the title Sri, Sriman, Srimati, Su-Sri: one endowed with Sri. A title originally in ancient times reserved for those who were initiated into Sri Vidya, they in whom God's glory of the universe has made a home, those who are endowed with knowledge, empowered with the energy and the intuition of mother Sri. The basic text of Sri Vidya says: one who knows mother Sri can never be orphaned. In the rituals and ceremonies in the Indian tradition, when one sips the holy water they say, Mayi Shrih Shrayatam: may Sri dwell in me. The word for refuge is Ashraya: to be one as Sri. "May many come taking refuge in me, may I seek refuge in none"--is the prayer of those who wish to have this capacity to give refuge. This capacity is Sri. You might translate Sri Vidya as the science of capacities, the science of potentialities. One of the first principles in Sri Vidya is that your individual self cannot be separated from the universal principles. In studying universal principles of any science, you must first be studying yourself. And the application of those principles must first be directed towards yourself so that you cannot study physics or chemistry without first studying yourself. This would make no sense to an average student of physics and chemistry, but, what about biochemistry? You see there a relationship between what you consider to be your individual self, mere body, and the constituents of the world. At least you see the connection between what is happening in you and what is happening in the test tube. Without understanding that link there can be neither biochemistry nor pharmacology. Sri-Vidya is thus a science of connections. The connections are realized not through writing research papers on them. But through processes of concentration, contemplation, meditation one achieves an assimilation of the universe and oneself. We said above that Sri Vidya is God's science of the universe. Here I reiterate what has often been taught in lectures on Sri Vidya. God's energy, capacity, potentiality is three-fold; iccha, jñana, kriya. These are the three shaktis: iccha-shakti, jñana shakti, kriya-shakti, respectively the energy called will, knowledge, and action. In that which you know to be self; in that which you know the self that is God; in that which you know to be the universe that is God, that is in God. In God that is the universe, God that is in the universe, God that is in you, God that is you. These sentences must not be taken in a sequence, for if you depend on sequence of thoughts, then you will never reach that knowledge which in the yoga sutras is called a-krama, knowledge without sequence, simultaneous; flash of lightning, of truth; as knowledge in which these principles are not studied in a logical sequence, through an intellectual process but all of them flash as one.--(See Yoga-sutras III. 54) When this, God's science of creation, maintenance and dissolution, through his power called will, knowledge and action, is absorbed, assimilated, is fully realized by the yogi he is then the master of Sri Vidya. Even these words are sequential, for the language fails here. Sri Vidya is the science of energy fields of the metaphysical universe. The energy fields that are non-sentient and the energy fields that are sentient; the energy fields that know themselves to be, the sentient ones, and the energy fields that do not know themselves to be or whose degree of knowing is somewhat reduced. When these energy fields are seen as parts of a single assimilated whole, then you begin to understand Sri Vidya, and that the microcosm and the macrocosm; the pinda and brahmanda; the shape and form on one hand and linga, that is your subtle body, your operative self, and the egg of God, the ovum that is the universe: all these are inseparable. The Newsweek, one of the bibles of the modern world, on May 4, 1992, starts an article titled "God's Handwriting, " with these words: "There is no dearth of creation myths, from Easter Island's bird-god that laid the world egg to the Old Testament's six days of Genesis." Actually, this concept of the universe as an egg is very basic to the Indian tradition of cosmology. Often the form of the linga, the sign of the presence of light that is worshipped in the temples of India, is somewhat oval; it represents the 1. For a deeper understanding of the Yoga-Sutras, it is recommended to study: 1) The Commentary by Hariharananda Aranya, S.U.N.Y. Press. 2) The Commentary by Usharbudh Arya, Himalayan Publishers, and 3) instruction cassettes available from Rishikesh Foundation, P.O. Box 279, Clarence, NY 14031. universe expanding within an oval space. If you take away the physical body of a human being, what remains is the oval of light. Sri Vidya begins where quantum physics ends. The contemporary philosophers of science have reached a cul de sac, and do not seem to know where to go from there because they are presented with enigmas, the gigantic, vast and majestic koans, the mysteries of the universe in a jyotir-bindu, a pinpoint of light that is infinitesimal. Infinitesimal because the space has not yet been created, therefore it has no location because locations are in space. So the question of where this pinpoint of light was or is, is like a question of what happens to a soul after death, where does it go? Well, where does it go? Where is there to go? You talk of the soul as if it were something confined to spaces and times, so you speak of after death and before birth and the soul going away someplace as though it has a passport to galaxies or something. It's an n/a question: not applicable. Yet because we are so conditioned to going in space, we cannot imagine a condition wherein space has not yet been created. So with regard to where the pinpoint of light is or was, that some say, explodes into a big bang, this question of where does not arise, because if the universe has not yet been created, no space has been created. Now, here, please, I'm not trying to establish points of compromise between modern science and the ancient traditions. I'm speaking purely and simply in ancient terminologies Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 18, 2009 Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 hraum krishnaya namah Dear Members , According to Gaudiya Math and Iskcon understanding of Sri Caitanya philosophy the dvaita points refers to being different from God in quantity and advaita means being equal in quality when it comes to Jiva-rupa and Isvara-rupa - this refers to one verse of Gita with the word 'amsa' (part). Isckon and most of Gaudiyas sadhakas will never agree that Sankara's view on advaita can go together with Dvaita. Therefore I cant agree on that perspective of Sri Caitanya philosophy as we see that whole Sri Caitanya-Caritamrta (for example there is verse that if one reads Sankaras commentary then his spiritual life is ruined) and life of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Maharaja/Srila Prabhupada was the philosophical war agaisnt Sankaras Advaita. So this SJC (and some other Vaisnava) view that  - Dvaita-advaita refering to existence in the same time both Dvaita and Sankara Advaita philosphy - is only one interpretation. Normally followers of Sri Caitanya are always against Advaita and I dont agree that if both of them exist in history then there must be equally accurate. In the time of history many opposite views were going together but it doesnt mean they are equally right. When it comes to my understanding only one of this view can be right and for my sraddha its above understanding of Sri Caitanya philosophy. Regards Rafal Gendarz SJC Jyotish Guru -------------- Consultations & Pages http://rohinaa.com rafal Visti Larsen pisze: हरे राम कृषà¥à¤£ Dear Rajarshi, Namaskar. I will not go deep into the concepts of dvaita and advaita but say this: When both these philosophies exist strongly as means to approach God, we cannot say that one is more accurate than the other. Both philosophies have very strong stand points. Its obvious that you believe truly in the Advaita philosophy. Its good that you recognise this in yourself. In the first lesson on the Jaimini Sutras we are taught that everyone believes either in Dvaita and Advaita in truth. And further that we only reach God once we realise both approaches... not just intellectualise them. This is something a bit new and was what Sri Chaitanya was teaching, namely the Dvaita-Advaita approach. Some say this is akin to the teachings of Vyasa and Jaimini. I hope this clarifies. Yours sincerely, Visti Larsen ---------- Jyotish Guru (Vedic Astrologer) www: http://srigaruda.com @: visti (AT) srigaruda (DOT) com rajarshi nandy skrev: Namaste  None of them agreed to this and they pointed out that if God is both dual and non-dual then it is only that the Mahavidya is overcoming our concept of duality or non-duality, whichever is stronger in us.   I can comment on the philosophical point raised in the mail - and I firmly disgree to this. Someone, anyone, who resides in the state of perfect non-duality is already beyond everything, EVERYTHING. Deities, rituals etc etc. So the idea of Mahavidya or anyone helping to overcome non-duality really does not arise, because there is nothing to overcome beyond that. That itself is the final goal, theoritically at least. Few every in the history of sadhaks have touched that state of nonduality being in this physical plane. It is such an idea that it cannot be even talked about because talking involves the mind and this, as they say, is beyond the mind. As long as the mind remains duality remains, once the mind is transcended entirely, it is non dual. So therefore, all these discussion of correlation etc etc and any deity for that matter is firmly in the relam of duality.  -Regards  Rajarshi     The upsurge (of consciousness) is Bhairava - Shiva Sutra --- On Fri, 12/6/09, Visti Larsen <visti (AT) srigaruda (DOT) com> wrote: Visti Larsen <visti (AT) srigaruda (DOT) com> [Om Krishna Guru] Mahavidya, Devata and Graha , sohamsa , jaiminisutra , jaiminiupadesa Friday, 12 June, 2009, 3:14 AM हरे राम कृषà¥à¤£ Dear Narasimha, Sarbani, Arpad et. al, Namaskar. In the entire discussion on Mahavidya and Grahas, I wished to point out that the simplicity with which Narasimha pointed out the Mahavidya and their equivalents was lacking proper comprehension of the concept of Graha and Devata. Two points I saw were mainly lacking. One philosophical and one Jyotish point. Firstly, Narasimha, you equate Mahavidya with: 'she who which helps overcome duality'. I didn't like this explanation yet I took it to myself to ask some Sadhakas who have practised Mahavidya mantras for the last couple of years. None of them agreed to this and they pointed out that if God is both dual and non-dual then it is only that the Mahavidya is overcoming our concept of duality or non-duality, whichever is stronger in us. This made me understand that your statement is solely in the eyes of the beholder... in this case you or the one who told you this. My next point is linked to this. Secondly, Narasimha, the means through which you linked the Mahavidya to the Graha is very far away from any way that I have seen Grahas and Devata linked. Lets take something simple, i.e. Why is Sun equated to Shiva? Really Sun is not Shiva, how can we say that the cooling and soothing Shiva mantras are like that hot hot Sun? Impossible really. At most you can say that Agni is the closest equivalent to the Sun or Suryadeva himself. In truth we are all taught that in the Pancha Devata puja that Shiva purifies and balances the Vayu Tattva and therefore also symbolises the strength of the Maruts which he is always so closely linked to in the Puranas. Because of this some astrologers TEND to equate Shiva with Shani as he is able to overcome the worst Vaata-disturbances, calm the mind and also remove all fears and sorrow, but that doesn't mean that Shiva is Shani but does have the power to overcome the Tattva that Shani represents. This by no means implies that we can prescribe Shiva mantras for all Shani problems, not at all. Nor does it mean that Rudraksha is advised by the Rishis for all Devata represented by Surya, far from it. So again, how did Shiva get equated with Surya when we came to the Graha level? It is because Shiva is able to enlighten the self of its true identity and since the Sun represents this self or Atma as an individual (vayu causes separation), Shiva SHOULD be worshipped to correct this main issue with the self. Its good for you to worship Shiva to overcome these issues with (non)duality. You know this, so why didn't you think in similar terms with the Mahavidya? i.e. What is the purpose of the Mahavidya and what is the Mother really doing to us? You could have stuck to iconography (sva/lagna-approach ) of the Mahavidya and then surely gone wrong but at least come to something useful. I.e. Rahu represents the female widower and hence Dhumavati SHOULD be represented by Rahu, whilst Ketu represents the one depicted without a head one and therefore SHOULD at a very base level be represented by Ketu. Again note that we are sticking to iconography here. But, we are not looking for Graha-representatio n as this cannot be within the concept of Mahavidya. Mahavidya implies at its root that there is some vidya and some a-vidya and the Mahavidya is giving complete knowledge of all of these and also correcting wrong vidya (another way of looking at a-vidya). In the first year of Jaimini Sutras (feel free to listen to it online) we are taught that the concept of Avidya is linked to Badhaka, a principle enforced by the words of Harihara, author of Prasna Marga. Using this understanding, principally Ketu is corrected by the Mahavidya whose iconography resembles Rahu, and therefore only Dhumavati is worshipped to overcome the A-vidya of Ketu. This concept was revealed to a select few of us in Vineland, New Jersey in the summer of 2003. Similarly, you will hear statements such as, the worship of Tarini makes one the best student (Mercury), and the worship of Tripurasundari makes one able to continue the Sampradaya (Jupiter), and therefore ALL traditions of India stay alive due to the worship of Sri Tripurasundari. Yet, in practice Tripurasundari is advised to correct the faults of Mercury and Tarini is worshipped to correct the faults of Jupiter, and thereby enable the relationship of the teacher and student to be the best... again see that Mercury and Jupiter are natural Badhaka's to each other in the charts. This implies that Mahavidya is really a means of removing the natural Badhaka of the Graha as that is the place of A-vidya of that Graha. We affectionately say that Tarini is the Mother of Jupiter and that Tripura is the Mother if Mercury... but is not Mercury. Maharishi Vashishta, father of Shakta and grandfather of Maharishi Parashara, worshipped Sri Tarini Devi for thousands of years, as described in the Tara Tantra, to attain the fruit of good children. He had suffered on account of the demise of his son Shakta, and the direct lineage was broken. It was because of Tara's blessing that he attained an illustrious progeny which we today consider the fountain head of all knowledge of spirituality. So, should one question the age and practice of the Mahavidya's, we can go very very far back. This further confirms that Sri Tarini is worshipped to correct the flaws in Jupiter and is therefore appropriately praised as Sri Kuleshvari by many. Further, in practice ladies and men with great blockages and doshas with respect to children have seen all such problems removed through the worship of Sri Tarini confirming this. Should we then go into how the Grahas are linked to Jyotirlingas or even Avataras? Point is that simple justification will not suffice to describe the Devata's and brings the lists given without such consideration to much question. I hope my points will bring clarity to teachers and students alike. Yours sincerely, Visti Larsen ------------ --------- --------- --------- ---- Jyotish Guru (Vedic Astrologer) www: http://srigaruda. com @: visti (AT) srigaruda (DOT) com Explore and discover exciting holidays and getaways with India Travel Click here! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 18, 2009 Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 Jai Ho......................Prabhu.................Rafel............. I donot like ti get into "ism & schism".............. They are all" bhaktas in my mind"................ I ALWAYS "SHOOT MY MOUTH" and get into "trouble" with these "socalled gurus"..........in NYC........... Radhe Radhe......... Starman............--- On Thu, 6/18/09, RafaÅ‚ Gendarz <starsuponme wrote: RafaÅ‚ Gendarz <starsuponmeRe: [Om Krishna Guru] Mahavidya, Devata and Graha Date: Thursday, June 18, 2009, 7:57 AM hraum krishnaya namahDear Members ,According to Gaudiya Math and Iskcon understanding of Sri Caitanya philosophy the dvaita points refers to being different from God in quantity and advaitameans being equal in quality when it comes to Jiva-rupa and Isvara-rupa - this refers to one verse of Gita with the word 'amsa' (part). Isckon and most of Gaudiyas sadhakas will neveragree that Sankara's view on advaita can go together with Dvaita. Therefore I cant agree on that perspective of Sri Caitanya philosophy as we see that whole Sri Caitanya-Caritamrta (for example there is verse that if one reads Sankaras commentary then his spiritual life is ruined) and life of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Maharaja/Srila Prabhupada was the philosophical war agaisnt Sankaras Advaita. So this SJC (and some other Vaisnava) view that - Dvaita-advaita refering to existence in the same time both Dvaita and Sankara Advaita philosphy - is only one interpretation. Normally followers of Sri Caitanya are always against Advaita and I dont agree that if both of them exist in history then there must be equally accurate. In the time of history many opposite views were going together but it doesnt mean they are equally right. When it comes to my understanding only one of this view can be right and for my sraddha its above understanding of Sri Caitanya philosophy.RegardsRafal GendarzSJC Jyotish Guru------------ --Consultations & Pageshttp://rohinaa. comrafal (AT) rohinaa (DOT) comVisti Larsen pisze: हरे राम कृषà¥à¤£Dear Rajarshi, Namaskar.I will not go deep into the concepts of dvaita and advaita but say this:When both these philosophies exist strongly as means to approach God, we cannot say that one is more accurate than the other. Both philosophies have very strong stand points.Its obvious that you believe truly in the Advaita philosophy. Its good that you recognise this in yourself. In the first lesson on the Jaimini Sutras we are taught that everyone believes either in Dvaita and Advaita in truth. And further that we only reach God once we realise both approaches.. . not just intellectualise them. This is something a bit new and was what Sri Chaitanya was teaching, namely the Dvaita-Advaita approach. Some say this is akin to the teachings of Vyasa and Jaimini.I hope this clarifies.Yours sincerely, Visti Larsen------------ --------- --------- --------- ----Jyotish Guru (Vedic Astrologer) www: http://srigaruda. com@: visti (AT) srigaruda (DOT) com rajarshi nandy skrev: Namaste None of them agreed to this and they pointed out that if God is both dual and non-dual then it is only that the Mahavidya is overcoming our concept of duality or non-duality, whichever is stronger in us. I can comment on the philosophical point raised in the mail - and I firmly disgree to this. Someone, anyone, who resides in the state of perfect non-duality is already beyond everything, EVERYTHING. Deities, rituals etc etc. So the idea of Mahavidya or anyone helping to overcome non-duality really does not arise, because there is nothing to overcome beyond that. That itself is the final goal, theoritically at least. Few every in the history of sadhaks have touched that state of nonduality being in this physical plane. It is such an idea that it cannot be even talked about because talking involves the mind and this, as they say, is beyond the mind. As long as the mind remains duality remains, once the mind is transcended entirely, it is non dual. So therefore, all these discussion of correlation etc etc and any deity for that matter is firmly in the relam of duality. -Regards Rajarshi The upsurge (of consciousness) is Bhairava - Shiva Sutra--- On Fri, 12/6/09, Visti Larsen <visti (AT) srigaruda (DOT) com> wrote: Visti Larsen <visti (AT) srigaruda (DOT) com>[Om Krishna Guru] Mahavidya, Devata and Graha, sohamsa@ .com, jaiminisutra, jaiminiupadesaFriday, 12 June, 2009, 3:14 AM हरे राम कृषà¥à¤£Dear Narasimha, Sarbani, Arpad et. al, Namaskar.In the entire discussion on Mahavidya and Grahas, I wished to point out that the simplicity with which Narasimha pointed out the Mahavidya and their equivalents was lacking proper comprehension of the concept of Graha and Devata.Two points I saw were mainly lacking. One philosophical and one Jyotish point.Firstly, Narasimha, you equate Mahavidya with: 'she who which helps overcome duality'. I didn't like this explanation yet I took it to myself to ask some Sadhakas who have practised Mahavidya mantras for the last couple of years. None of them agreed to this and they pointed out that if God is both dual and non-dual then it is only that the Mahavidya is overcoming our concept of duality or non-duality, whichever is stronger in us. This made me understand that your statement is solely in the eyes of the beholder... in this case you or the one who told you this.My next point is linked to this.Secondly, Narasimha, the means through which you linked the Mahavidya to the Graha is very far away from any way that I have seen Grahas and Devata linked. Lets take something simple, i.e. Why is Sun equated to Shiva? Really Sun is not Shiva, how can we say that the cooling and soothing Shiva mantras are like that hot hot Sun? Impossible really. At most you can say that Agni is the closest equivalent to the Sun or Suryadeva himself. In truth we are all taught that in the Pancha Devata puja that Shiva purifies and balances the Vayu Tattva and therefore also symbolises the strength of the Maruts which he is always so closely linked to in the Puranas. Because of this some astrologers TEND to equate Shiva with Shani as he is able to overcome the worst Vaata-disturbances, calm the mind and also remove all fears and sorrow, but that doesn't mean that Shiva is Shani but does have the power to overcome the Tattva that Shani represents. This by no means implies that we can prescribe Shiva mantras for all Shani problems, not at all. Nor does it mean that Rudraksha is advised by the Rishis for all Devata represented by Surya, far from it.So again, how did Shiva get equated with Surya when we came to the Graha level? It is because Shiva is able to enlighten the self of its true identity and since the Sun represents this self or Atma as an individual (vayu causes separation), Shiva SHOULD be worshipped to correct this main issue with the self. Its good for you to worship Shiva to overcome these issues with (non)duality.You know this, so why didn't you think in similar terms with the Mahavidya? i.e. What is the purpose of the Mahavidya and what is the Mother really doing to us?You could have stuck to iconography (sva/lagna-approach ) of the Mahavidya and then surely gone wrong but at least come to something useful. I.e. Rahu represents the female widower and hence Dhumavati SHOULD be represented by Rahu, whilst Ketu represents the one depicted without a head one and therefore SHOULD at a very base level be represented by Ketu. Again note that we are sticking to iconography here.But, we are not looking for Graha-representatio n as this cannot be within the concept of Mahavidya. Mahavidya implies at its root that there is some vidya and some a-vidya and the Mahavidya is giving complete knowledge of all of these and also correcting wrong vidya (another way of looking at a-vidya). In the first year of Jaimini Sutras (feel free to listen to it online) we are taught that the concept of Avidya is linked to Badhaka, a principle enforced by the words of Harihara, author of Prasna Marga. Using this understanding, principally Ketu is corrected by the Mahavidya whose iconography resembles Rahu, and therefore only Dhumavati is worshipped to overcome the A-vidya of Ketu. This concept was revealed to a select few of us in Vineland, New Jersey in the summer of 2003.Similarly, you will hear statements such as, the worship of Tarini makes one the best student (Mercury), and the worship of Tripurasundari makes one able to continue the Sampradaya (Jupiter), and therefore ALL traditions of India stay alive due to the worship of Sri Tripurasundari. Yet, in practice Tripurasundari is advised to correct the faults of Mercury and Tarini is worshipped to correct the faults of Jupiter, and thereby enable the relationship of the teacher and student to be the best... again see that Mercury and Jupiter are natural Badhaka's to each other in the charts.This implies that Mahavidya is really a means of removing the natural Badhaka of the Graha as that is the place of A-vidya of that Graha. We affectionately say that Tarini is the Mother of Jupiter and that Tripura is the Mother if Mercury... but is not Mercury.Maharishi Vashishta, father of Shakta and grandfather of Maharishi Parashara, worshipped Sri Tarini Devi for thousands of years, as described in the Tara Tantra, to attain the fruit of good children. He had suffered on account of the demise of his son Shakta, and the direct lineage was broken. It was because of Tara's blessing that he attained an illustrious progeny which we today consider the fountain head of all knowledge of spirituality. So, should one question the age and practice of the Mahavidya's, we can go very very far back. This further confirms that Sri Tarini is worshipped to correct the flaws in Jupiter and is therefore appropriately praised as Sri Kuleshvari by many. Further, in practice ladies and men with great blockages and doshas with respect to children have seen all such problems removed through the worship of Sri Tarini confirming this.Should we then go into how the Grahas are linked to Jyotirlingas or even Avataras? Point is that simple justification will not suffice to describe the Devata's and brings the lists given without such consideration to much question.I hope my points will bring clarity to teachers and students alike.Yours sincerely, Visti Larsen------------ --------- --------- --------- ----Jyotish Guru (Vedic Astrologer) www: http://srigaruda. com@: visti (AT) srigaruda (DOT) com Explore and discover exciting holidays and getaways with India Travel Click here! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 18, 2009 Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 हरे राम कृषà¥à¤£ Dear Rafal, Namaskar. Thank you for your view. Its good that you have admitted to yourself that you believe in Dvaita. Further discussion on your personal view of God is between you and your Diksha/spiritual Guru, as your view of God is in reality your relationship between your Atmakaraka and Ishta Devata, and treating this purely from a scholarly perspective will not do justice to your spiritual path. I'm happy that you have wanted to tread upon this discussion from a scholarly perspective knowing your degree in philosophy. When we start publishing the writings of Sri Achyutananda Dasa from the Shunya Samhita and Chayalisa Patala, we can again scrutinize the teachings of the Parampara. Further in Orissa there exists a much larger version of the Chaitanya Charitaamrita which would be worthwhile to look into. In the meantime it would be worthwhile to examine the word 'maayaavaada' in the Chaitanya Charitamrita as it is this word that people have interpreted as referring to the Shankaracharya's teachings. Further, to make the scholarly debate more fulfilling, we need to know how the scholars understood Sri Chaitanya's teachings in the Charitamrita as being Dvaita. I.e. where is the specific view/quote, etc. which justified this view? Further, how are we to interpret Sri Chaitanya's Bhava as Radha from within the Dvaita philosophy? Further, Sri Chaitanya is compared by many to Sri Vyasa, and if so what was Sri Vyasa's teachings in the same regard? What did his student Maharishi Jaimini teach in the Mimamsa Sutras? This is all a very tough job, but is worth dwelving into. Restrict yourself solely to the points above, as when you start dwelling deeper into the various philosophies of various Paramparas you will start finding a large hodgepodge of views and traditions. Start writing on the day of your ninth lord, and preferably the Yama of the same. Publish your writings in the Jyotish Digest, Sohamsa.com, or any such suitable place that you like. Now for some Jyotisha. Vaishnava teachings will always come from two Grahas based on the statement of Maharishi Jaimini "budha-shaani-bhyaaM viShNau". Maharishi Parasara agrees to this and has stated the same. For this reason if the Vishnu Avatara does in fact incarnate, there WILL be two schools of thought emanating from the same, i.e. one Budha and one Shani. The one emanating from Budha will focus on the karmas of man as Budha is the primary Karaka for the tenth house, whilst the one emanating from Shani will focus on the purity and dushtakarmas of man where many rules and restrictions will have to be met to keep this purity. And this is exactly what happened. Sri Chaitanya established the lineage with the six goswami's in Bengal who follow a strict and very orthodox/conservative path (Shani), and then in Orissa he through the five sakha's re-established a means to follow the four purusharthas + one spiritual path (pancha-mahapurusha yoga). In the latter school we see a clear focus on performing karma which leads to God such as Jyotish, Yantra, Bhakti, Tattva and Agama (further descriptions of their work can be seen in the Shunya Samhita). Looking forward to more writing from you. Maybe the philosophy part is too heavy for this basics-forum, but feel free to otherwise point people towards your further writings. Yours sincerely, Visti Larsen ---------- Jyotish Guru (Vedic Astrologer) www: http://srigaruda.com @: visti RafaÅ‚ Gendarz skrev: hraum krishnaya namah Dear Members , According to Gaudiya Math and Iskcon understanding of Sri Caitanya philosophy the dvaita points refers to being different from God in quantity and advaita means being equal in quality when it comes to Jiva-rupa and Isvara-rupa - this refers to one verse of Gita with the word 'amsa' (part). Isckon and most of Gaudiyas sadhakas will never agree that Sankara's view on advaita can go together with Dvaita. Therefore I cant agree on that perspective of Sri Caitanya philosophy as we see that whole Sri Caitanya-Caritamrta (for example there is verse that if one reads Sankaras commentary then his spiritual life is ruined) and life of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Maharaja/Srila Prabhupada was the philosophical war agaisnt Sankaras Advaita. So this SJC (and some other Vaisnava) view that  - Dvaita-advaita refering to existence in the same time both Dvaita and Sankara Advaita philosphy - is only one interpretation. Normally followers of Sri Caitanya are always against Advaita and I dont agree that if both of them exist in history then there must be equally accurate. In the time of history many opposite views were going together but it doesnt mean they are equally right. When it comes to my understanding only one of this view can be right and for my sraddha its above understanding of Sri Caitanya philosophy. Regards Rafal Gendarz SJC Jyotish Guru -------------- Consultations & Pages http://rohinaa.com rafal (AT) rohinaa (DOT) com Visti Larsen pisze: हरे राम कृषà¥à¤£ Dear Rajarshi, Namaskar. I will not go deep into the concepts of dvaita and advaita but say this: When both these philosophies exist strongly as means to approach God, we cannot say that one is more accurate than the other. Both philosophies have very strong stand points. Its obvious that you believe truly in the Advaita philosophy. Its good that you recognise this in yourself. In the first lesson on the Jaimini Sutras we are taught that everyone believes either in Dvaita and Advaita in truth. And further that we only reach God once we realise both approaches... not just intellectualise them. This is something a bit new and was what Sri Chaitanya was teaching, namely the Dvaita-Advaita approach. Some say this is akin to the teachings of Vyasa and Jaimini. I hope this clarifies. Yours sincerely, Visti Larsen ---------- Jyotish Guru (Vedic Astrologer) www: http://srigaruda.com @: visti (AT) srigaruda (DOT) com rajarshi nandy skrev: Namaste  None of them agreed to this and they pointed out that if God is both dual and non-dual then it is only that the Mahavidya is overcoming our concept of duality or non-duality, whichever is stronger in us.   I can comment on the philosophical point raised in the mail - and I firmly disgree to this. Someone, anyone, who resides in the state of perfect non-duality is already beyond everything, EVERYTHING. Deities, rituals etc etc. So the idea of Mahavidya or anyone helping to overcome non-duality really does not arise, because there is nothing to overcome beyond that. That itself is the final goal, theoritically at least. Few every in the history of sadhaks have touched that state of nonduality being in this physical plane. It is such an idea that it cannot be even talked about because talking involves the mind and this, as they say, is beyond the mind. As long as the mind remains duality remains, once the mind is transcended entirely, it is non dual. So therefore, all these discussion of correlation etc etc and any deity for that matter is firmly in the relam of duality.  -Regards  Rajarshi     The upsurge (of consciousness) is Bhairava - Shiva Sutra --- On Fri, 12/6/09, Visti Larsen <visti (AT) srigaruda (DOT) com> wrote: Visti Larsen <visti (AT) srigaruda (DOT) com> [Om Krishna Guru] Mahavidya, Devata and Graha , sohamsa , jaiminisutra , jaiminiupadesa Friday, 12 June, 2009, 3:14 AM हरे राम कृषà¥à¤£ Dear Narasimha, Sarbani, Arpad et. al, Namaskar. In the entire discussion on Mahavidya and Grahas, I wished to point out that the simplicity with which Narasimha pointed out the Mahavidya and their equivalents was lacking proper comprehension of the concept of Graha and Devata. Two points I saw were mainly lacking. One philosophical and one Jyotish point. Firstly, Narasimha, you equate Mahavidya with: 'she who which helps overcome duality'. I didn't like this explanation yet I took it to myself to ask some Sadhakas who have practised Mahavidya mantras for the last couple of years. None of them agreed to this and they pointed out that if God is both dual and non-dual then it is only that the Mahavidya is overcoming our concept of duality or non-duality, whichever is stronger in us. This made me understand that your statement is solely in the eyes of the beholder... in this case you or the one who told you this. My next point is linked to this. Secondly, Narasimha, the means through which you linked the Mahavidya to the Graha is very far away from any way that I have seen Grahas and Devata linked. Lets take something simple, i.e. Why is Sun equated to Shiva? Really Sun is not Shiva, how can we say that the cooling and soothing Shiva mantras are like that hot hot Sun? Impossible really. At most you can say that Agni is the closest equivalent to the Sun or Suryadeva himself. In truth we are all taught that in the Pancha Devata puja that Shiva purifies and balances the Vayu Tattva and therefore also symbolises the strength of the Maruts which he is always so closely linked to in the Puranas. Because of this some astrologers TEND to equate Shiva with Shani as he is able to overcome the worst Vaata-disturbances, calm the mind and also remove all fears and sorrow, but that doesn't mean that Shiva is Shani but does have the power to overcome the Tattva that Shani represents. This by no means implies that we can prescribe Shiva mantras for all Shani problems, not at all. Nor does it mean that Rudraksha is advised by the Rishis for all Devata represented by Surya, far from it. So again, how did Shiva get equated with Surya when we came to the Graha level? It is because Shiva is able to enlighten the self of its true identity and since the Sun represents this self or Atma as an individual (vayu causes separation), Shiva SHOULD be worshipped to correct this main issue with the self. Its good for you to worship Shiva to overcome these issues with (non)duality. You know this, so why didn't you think in similar terms with the Mahavidya? i.e. What is the purpose of the Mahavidya and what is the Mother really doing to us? You could have stuck to iconography (sva/lagna-approach ) of the Mahavidya and then surely gone wrong but at least come to something useful. I.e. Rahu represents the female widower and hence Dhumavati SHOULD be represented by Rahu, whilst Ketu represents the one depicted without a head one and therefore SHOULD at a very base level be represented by Ketu. Again note that we are sticking to iconography here. But, we are not looking for Graha-representatio n as this cannot be within the concept of Mahavidya. Mahavidya implies at its root that there is some vidya and some a-vidya and the Mahavidya is giving complete knowledge of all of these and also correcting wrong vidya (another way of looking at a-vidya). In the first year of Jaimini Sutras (feel free to listen to it online) we are taught that the concept of Avidya is linked to Badhaka, a principle enforced by the words of Harihara, author of Prasna Marga. Using this understanding, principally Ketu is corrected by the Mahavidya whose iconography resembles Rahu, and therefore only Dhumavati is worshipped to overcome the A-vidya of Ketu. This concept was revealed to a select few of us in Vineland, New Jersey in the summer of 2003. Similarly, you will hear statements such as, the worship of Tarini makes one the best student (Mercury), and the worship of Tripurasundari makes one able to continue the Sampradaya (Jupiter), and therefore ALL traditions of India stay alive due to the worship of Sri Tripurasundari. Yet, in practice Tripurasundari is advised to correct the faults of Mercury and Tarini is worshipped to correct the faults of Jupiter, and thereby enable the relationship of the teacher and student to be the best... again see that Mercury and Jupiter are natural Badhaka's to each other in the charts. This implies that Mahavidya is really a means of removing the natural Badhaka of the Graha as that is the place of A-vidya of that Graha. We affectionately say that Tarini is the Mother of Jupiter and that Tripura is the Mother if Mercury... but is not Mercury. Maharishi Vashishta, father of Shakta and grandfather of Maharishi Parashara, worshipped Sri Tarini Devi for thousands of years, as described in the Tara Tantra, to attain the fruit of good children. He had suffered on account of the demise of his son Shakta, and the direct lineage was broken. It was because of Tara's blessing that he attained an illustrious progeny which we today consider the fountain head of all knowledge of spirituality. So, should one question the age and practice of the Mahavidya's, we can go very very far back. This further confirms that Sri Tarini is worshipped to correct the flaws in Jupiter and is therefore appropriately praised as Sri Kuleshvari by many. Further, in practice ladies and men with great blockages and doshas with respect to children have seen all such problems removed through the worship of Sri Tarini confirming this. Should we then go into how the Grahas are linked to Jyotirlingas or even Avataras? Point is that simple justification will not suffice to describe the Devata's and brings the lists given without such consideration to much question. I hope my points will bring clarity to teachers and students alike. Yours sincerely, Visti Larsen ------------ --------- --------- --------- ---- Jyotish Guru (Vedic Astrologer) www: http://srigaruda. com @: visti (AT) srigaruda (DOT) com Explore and discover exciting holidays and getaways with India Travel Click here! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 19, 2009 Report Share Posted June 19, 2009 hraum krishnaya namah Dear Guruji, Yes, I know there are many version of Sri Chaitanya Caritamrta and also Sri Caitanya Bhagavata. I remind myself some discussion with Sarbaniji about that point. Few years ago I have given up to discuss/debate about the final goal of life and its right path as very rarely one can guide the other soul about what is the right path, its more like risk and good spiritual fortune that one is able to choose proper Gurus in ayurveda, Jyotisha, atmajnana etc. I think thats the meaning of Sravana Nakshatra also. I was felt very lucky in this regard and I was always very satisfied and proud to be your sisya. Same goes with other branches, /the feeling/ that one is right in so delicate and abstract field like final spiritual path nearly cant be shared through anumana or pratyaksa. Normally the discussion is boiled down to material consequences of using words like prestige, popularity and the feeling of winning the debate, therefore even Sastras like Charaka Samhita gives the ways to overcome the oponent even with weak arguments. Srimad Bhagavatam calls these kind of discussions as Kali-debates (11 canto), where the truth is abandoned in the name of plurality/relativity of ways FOR THE rajasic feelings inside and outside (in the opponents) giving rise to stronger defense system (eating, sleeping, "sexing", defending). In the days where Satva was reigning first the authority was chosen then the teaching was sharing, otherwise putting the knowledge as the element for the rajasic vahana is sraddha/guru aparadha and I normally avoid that (if luck/Luck helps me). Like discussing the word 'mayavada' - if I consider the point of misinterpratation then my third and ninth houses are going weak due to changing the sraddha from the feet of my Gurus which states otherwise. So sometimes its even to be wrong but following Gurus word - this seems crazy but maybe its time to de-addict from western behaviours when playing with Vedas and its tools. I try to follow that and its nicely sooths my Rahu in lagna. Blindly following if Rahu is too strong (as the grey cells will still be working so consequently this gives rise to Balance-Satva-Brahmin-Jupiter). By following independent pratyaksa and anumana is the sign of Rahu, in the field of spirituality one should balance independent thinking (balancing ketu) and full "blind" faith (balancing rahu) - this is done by taking initiation and dedication to spiritual Guru (dhanus bhava is maraka and badhaka to Gemini - kingdom of Rahu). I didnt choose any muhurta for those mails I must (sadly) admit, however I feel it was good time to write this. Admiring your skill to avoid arguments and improve the gunas in the forum. Good job. Regards Rafal Gendarz SJC Jyotish Guru -------------- Consultations & Pages http://rohinaa.com rafal Visti Larsen pisze: हरे राम कृषà¥à¤£ Dear Rafal, Namaskar. Thank you for your view. Its good that you have admitted to yourself that you believe in Dvaita. Further discussion on your personal view of God is between you and your Diksha/spiritual Guru, as your view of God is in reality your relationship between your Atmakaraka and Ishta Devata, and treating this purely from a scholarly perspective will not do justice to your spiritual path. I'm happy that you have wanted to tread upon this discussion from a scholarly perspective knowing your degree in philosophy. When we start publishing the writings of Sri Achyutananda Dasa from the Shunya Samhita and Chayalisa Patala, we can again scrutinize the teachings of the Parampara. Further in Orissa there exists a much larger version of the Chaitanya Charitaamrita which would be worthwhile to look into. In the meantime it would be worthwhile to examine the word 'maayaavaada' in the Chaitanya Charitamrita as it is this word that people have interpreted as referring to the Shankaracharya's teachings. Further, to make the scholarly debate more fulfilling, we need to know how the scholars understood Sri Chaitanya's teachings in the Charitamrita as being Dvaita. I.e. where is the specific view/quote, etc. which justified this view? Further, how are we to interpret Sri Chaitanya's Bhava as Radha from within the Dvaita philosophy? Further, Sri Chaitanya is compared by many to Sri Vyasa, and if so what was Sri Vyasa's teachings in the same regard? What did his student Maharishi Jaimini teach in the Mimamsa Sutras? This is all a very tough job, but is worth dwelving into. Restrict yourself solely to the points above, as when you start dwelling deeper into the various philosophies of various Paramparas you will start finding a large hodgepodge of views and traditions. Start writing on the day of your ninth lord, and preferably the Yama of the same. Publish your writings in the Jyotish Digest, Sohamsa.com, or any such suitable place that you like. Now for some Jyotisha. Vaishnava teachings will always come from two Grahas based on the statement of Maharishi Jaimini "budha-shaani-bhyaaM viShNau". Maharishi Parasara agrees to this and has stated the same. For this reason if the Vishnu Avatara does in fact incarnate, there WILL be two schools of thought emanating from the same, i.e. one Budha and one Shani. The one emanating from Budha will focus on the karmas of man as Budha is the primary Karaka for the tenth house, whilst the one emanating from Shani will focus on the purity and dushtakarmas of man where many rules and restrictions will have to be met to keep this purity. And this is exactly what happened. Sri Chaitanya established the lineage with the six goswami's in Bengal who follow a strict and very orthodox/conservative path (Shani), and then in Orissa he through the five sakha's re-established a means to follow the four purusharthas + one spiritual path (pancha-mahapurusha yoga). In the latter school we see a clear focus on performing karma which leads to God such as Jyotish, Yantra, Bhakti, Tattva and Agama (further descriptions of their work can be seen in the Shunya Samhita). Looking forward to more writing from you. Maybe the philosophy part is too heavy for this basics-forum, but feel free to otherwise point people towards your further writings. Yours sincerely, Visti Larsen ---------- Jyotish Guru (Vedic Astrologer) www: http://srigaruda.com @: visti (AT) srigaruda (DOT) com RafaÅ‚ Gendarz skrev: hraum krishnaya namah Dear Members , According to Gaudiya Math and Iskcon understanding of Sri Caitanya philosophy the dvaita points refers to being different from God in quantity and advaita means being equal in quality when it comes to Jiva-rupa and Isvara-rupa - this refers to one verse of Gita with the word 'amsa' (part). Isckon and most of Gaudiyas sadhakas will never agree that Sankara's view on advaita can go together with Dvaita. Therefore I cant agree on that perspective of Sri Caitanya philosophy as we see that whole Sri Caitanya-Caritamrta (for example there is verse that if one reads Sankaras commentary then his spiritual life is ruined) and life of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Maharaja/Srila Prabhupada was the philosophical war agaisnt Sankaras Advaita. So this SJC (and some other Vaisnava) view that  - Dvaita-advaita refering to existence in the same time both Dvaita and Sankara Advaita philosphy - is only one interpretation. Normally followers of Sri Caitanya are always against Advaita and I dont agree that if both of them exist in history then there must be equally accurate. In the time of history many opposite views were going together but it doesnt mean they are equally right. When it comes to my understanding only one of this view can be right and for my sraddha its above understanding of Sri Caitanya philosophy. Regards Rafal Gendarz SJC Jyotish Guru -------------- Consultations & Pages http://rohinaa.com rafal (AT) rohinaa (DOT) com Visti Larsen pisze: हरे राम कृषà¥à¤£ Dear Rajarshi, Namaskar. I will not go deep into the concepts of dvaita and advaita but say this: When both these philosophies exist strongly as means to approach God, we cannot say that one is more accurate than the other. Both philosophies have very strong stand points. Its obvious that you believe truly in the Advaita philosophy. Its good that you recognise this in yourself. In the first lesson on the Jaimini Sutras we are taught that everyone believes either in Dvaita and Advaita in truth. And further that we only reach God once we realise both approaches... not just intellectualise them. This is something a bit new and was what Sri Chaitanya was teaching, namely the Dvaita-Advaita approach. Some say this is akin to the teachings of Vyasa and Jaimini. I hope this clarifies. Yours sincerely, Visti Larsen ---------- Jyotish Guru (Vedic Astrologer) www: http://srigaruda.com @: visti (AT) srigaruda (DOT) com rajarshi nandy skrev: Namaste  None of them agreed to this and they pointed out that if God is both dual and non-dual then it is only that the Mahavidya is overcoming our concept of duality or non-duality, whichever is stronger in us.   I can comment on the philosophical point raised in the mail - and I firmly disgree to this. Someone, anyone, who resides in the state of perfect non-duality is already beyond everything, EVERYTHING. Deities, rituals etc etc. So the idea of Mahavidya or anyone helping to overcome non-duality really does not arise, because there is nothing to overcome beyond that. That itself is the final goal, theoritically at least. Few every in the history of sadhaks have touched that state of nonduality being in this physical plane. It is such an idea that it cannot be even talked about because talking involves the mind and this, as they say, is beyond the mind. As long as the mind remains duality remains, once the mind is transcended entirely, it is non dual. So therefore, all these discussion of correlation etc etc and any deity for that matter is firmly in the relam of duality.  -Regards  Rajarshi     The upsurge (of consciousness) is Bhairava - Shiva Sutra --- On Fri, 12/6/09, Visti Larsen <visti (AT) srigaruda (DOT) com> wrote: Visti Larsen <visti (AT) srigaruda (DOT) com> [Om Krishna Guru] Mahavidya, Devata and Graha , sohamsa , jaiminisutra , jaiminiupadesa Friday, 12 June, 2009, 3:14 AM हरे राम कृषà¥à¤£ Dear Narasimha, Sarbani, Arpad et. al, Namaskar. In the entire discussion on Mahavidya and Grahas, I wished to point out that the simplicity with which Narasimha pointed out the Mahavidya and their equivalents was lacking proper comprehension of the concept of Graha and Devata. Two points I saw were mainly lacking. One philosophical and one Jyotish point. Firstly, Narasimha, you equate Mahavidya with: 'she who which helps overcome duality'. I didn't like this explanation yet I took it to myself to ask some Sadhakas who have practised Mahavidya mantras for the last couple of years. None of them agreed to this and they pointed out that if God is both dual and non-dual then it is only that the Mahavidya is overcoming our concept of duality or non-duality, whichever is stronger in us. This made me understand that your statement is solely in the eyes of the beholder... in this case you or the one who told you this. My next point is linked to this. Secondly, Narasimha, the means through which you linked the Mahavidya to the Graha is very far away from any way that I have seen Grahas and Devata linked. Lets take something simple, i.e. Why is Sun equated to Shiva? Really Sun is not Shiva, how can we say that the cooling and soothing Shiva mantras are like that hot hot Sun? Impossible really. At most you can say that Agni is the closest equivalent to the Sun or Suryadeva himself. In truth we are all taught that in the Pancha Devata puja that Shiva purifies and balances the Vayu Tattva and therefore also symbolises the strength of the Maruts which he is always so closely linked to in the Puranas. Because of this some astrologers TEND to equate Shiva with Shani as he is able to overcome the worst Vaata-disturbances, calm the mind and also remove all fears and sorrow, but that doesn't mean that Shiva is Shani but does have the power to overcome the Tattva that Shani represents. This by no means implies that we can prescribe Shiva mantras for all Shani problems, not at all. Nor does it mean that Rudraksha is advised by the Rishis for all Devata represented by Surya, far from it. So again, how did Shiva get equated with Surya when we came to the Graha level? It is because Shiva is able to enlighten the self of its true identity and since the Sun represents this self or Atma as an individual (vayu causes separation), Shiva SHOULD be worshipped to correct this main issue with the self. Its good for you to worship Shiva to overcome these issues with (non)duality. You know this, so why didn't you think in similar terms with the Mahavidya? i.e. What is the purpose of the Mahavidya and what is the Mother really doing to us? You could have stuck to iconography (sva/lagna-approach ) of the Mahavidya and then surely gone wrong but at least come to something useful. I.e. Rahu represents the female widower and hence Dhumavati SHOULD be represented by Rahu, whilst Ketu represents the one depicted without a head one and therefore SHOULD at a very base level be represented by Ketu. Again note that we are sticking to iconography here. But, we are not looking for Graha-representatio n as this cannot be within the concept of Mahavidya. Mahavidya implies at its root that there is some vidya and some a-vidya and the Mahavidya is giving complete knowledge of all of these and also correcting wrong vidya (another way of looking at a-vidya). In the first year of Jaimini Sutras (feel free to listen to it online) we are taught that the concept of Avidya is linked to Badhaka, a principle enforced by the words of Harihara, author of Prasna Marga. Using this understanding, principally Ketu is corrected by the Mahavidya whose iconography resembles Rahu, and therefore only Dhumavati is worshipped to overcome the A-vidya of Ketu. This concept was revealed to a select few of us in Vineland, New Jersey in the summer of 2003. Similarly, you will hear statements such as, the worship of Tarini makes one the best student (Mercury), and the worship of Tripurasundari makes one able to continue the Sampradaya (Jupiter), and therefore ALL traditions of India stay alive due to the worship of Sri Tripurasundari. Yet, in practice Tripurasundari is advised to correct the faults of Mercury and Tarini is worshipped to correct the faults of Jupiter, and thereby enable the relationship of the teacher and student to be the best... again see that Mercury and Jupiter are natural Badhaka's to each other in the charts. This implies that Mahavidya is really a means of removing the natural Badhaka of the Graha as that is the place of A-vidya of that Graha. We affectionately say that Tarini is the Mother of Jupiter and that Tripura is the Mother if Mercury... but is not Mercury. Maharishi Vashishta, father of Shakta and grandfather of Maharishi Parashara, worshipped Sri Tarini Devi for thousands of years, as described in the Tara Tantra, to attain the fruit of good children. He had suffered on account of the demise of his son Shakta, and the direct lineage was broken. It was because of Tara's blessing that he attained an illustrious progeny which we today consider the fountain head of all knowledge of spirituality. So, should one question the age and practice of the Mahavidya's, we can go very very far back. This further confirms that Sri Tarini is worshipped to correct the flaws in Jupiter and is therefore appropriately praised as Sri Kuleshvari by many. Further, in practice ladies and men with great blockages and doshas with respect to children have seen all such problems removed through the worship of Sri Tarini confirming this. Should we then go into how the Grahas are linked to Jyotirlingas or even Avataras? Point is that simple justification will not suffice to describe the Devata's and brings the lists given without such consideration to much question. I hope my points will bring clarity to teachers and students alike. Yours sincerely, Visti Larsen ------------ --------- --------- --------- ---- Jyotish Guru (Vedic Astrologer) www: http://srigaruda. com @: visti (AT) srigaruda (DOT) com Explore and discover exciting holidays and getaways with India Travel Click here! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 19, 2009 Report Share Posted June 19, 2009 हरे राम कृषà¥à¤£ Dear Rafal, Namaskar. Nice mail. Well put. Just an addition to kindle your thoughts: Maybe you should sometimes question interpretations so that you will also know the reasons yourself? That will make you understand and appreciate the Guru's words even more. I know you know this, just reminding you. Yours sincerely, Visti Larsen ---------- Jyotish Guru (Vedic Astrologer) www: http://srigaruda.com @: visti RafaÅ‚ Gendarz skrev: hraum krishnaya namah Dear Guruji, Yes, I know there are many version of Sri Chaitanya Caritamrta and also Sri Caitanya Bhagavata. I remind myself some discussion with Sarbaniji about that point. Few years ago I have given up to discuss/debate about the final goal of life and its right path as very rarely one can guide the other soul about what is the right path, its more like risk and good spiritual fortune that one is able to choose proper Gurus in ayurveda, Jyotisha, atmajnana etc. I think thats the meaning of Sravana Nakshatra also. I was felt very lucky in this regard and I was always very satisfied and proud to be your sisya. Same goes with other branches, /the feeling/ that one is right in so delicate and abstract field like final spiritual path nearly cant be shared through anumana or pratyaksa. Normally the discussion is boiled down to material consequences of using words like prestige, popularity and the feeling of winning the debate, therefore even Sastras like Charaka Samhita gives the ways to overcome the oponent even with weak arguments. Srimad Bhagavatam calls these kind of discussions as Kali-debates (11 canto), where the truth is abandoned in the name of plurality/relativity of ways FOR THE rajasic feelings inside and outside (in the opponents) giving rise to stronger defense system (eating, sleeping, "sexing", defending). In the days where Satva was reigning first the authority was chosen then the teaching was sharing, otherwise putting the knowledge as the element for the rajasic vahana is sraddha/guru aparadha and I normally avoid that (if luck/Luck helps me). Like discussing the word 'mayavada' - if I consider the point of misinterpratation then my third and ninth houses are going weak due to changing the sraddha from the feet of my Gurus which states otherwise. So sometimes its even to be wrong but following Gurus word - this seems crazy but maybe its time to de-addict from western behaviours when playing with Vedas and its tools. I try to follow that and its nicely sooths my Rahu in lagna. Blindly following if Rahu is too strong (as the grey cells will still be working so consequently this gives rise to Balance-Satva-Brahmin-Jupiter). By following independent pratyaksa and anumana is the sign of Rahu, in the field of spirituality one should balance independent thinking (balancing ketu) and full "blind" faith (balancing rahu) - this is done by taking initiation and dedication to spiritual Guru (dhanus bhava is maraka and badhaka to Gemini - kingdom of Rahu). I didnt choose any muhurta for those mails I must (sadly) admit, however I feel it was good time to write this. Admiring your skill to avoid arguments and improve the gunas in the forum. Good job. Regards Rafal Gendarz SJC Jyotish Guru -------------- Consultations & Pages http://rohinaa.com rafal (AT) rohinaa (DOT) com Visti Larsen pisze: हरे राम कृषà¥à¤£ Dear Rafal, Namaskar. Thank you for your view. Its good that you have admitted to yourself that you believe in Dvaita. Further discussion on your personal view of God is between you and your Diksha/spiritual Guru, as your view of God is in reality your relationship between your Atmakaraka and Ishta Devata, and treating this purely from a scholarly perspective will not do justice to your spiritual path. I'm happy that you have wanted to tread upon this discussion from a scholarly perspective knowing your degree in philosophy. When we start publishing the writings of Sri Achyutananda Dasa from the Shunya Samhita and Chayalisa Patala, we can again scrutinize the teachings of the Parampara. Further in Orissa there exists a much larger version of the Chaitanya Charitaamrita which would be worthwhile to look into. In the meantime it would be worthwhile to examine the word 'maayaavaada' in the Chaitanya Charitamrita as it is this word that people have interpreted as referring to the Shankaracharya's teachings. Further, to make the scholarly debate more fulfilling, we need to know how the scholars understood Sri Chaitanya's teachings in the Charitamrita as being Dvaita. I.e. where is the specific view/quote, etc. which justified this view? Further, how are we to interpret Sri Chaitanya's Bhava as Radha from within the Dvaita philosophy? Further, Sri Chaitanya is compared by many to Sri Vyasa, and if so what was Sri Vyasa's teachings in the same regard? What did his student Maharishi Jaimini teach in the Mimamsa Sutras? This is all a very tough job, but is worth dwelving into. Restrict yourself solely to the points above, as when you start dwelling deeper into the various philosophies of various Paramparas you will start finding a large hodgepodge of views and traditions. Start writing on the day of your ninth lord, and preferably the Yama of the same. Publish your writings in the Jyotish Digest, Sohamsa.com, or any such suitable place that you like. Now for some Jyotisha. Vaishnava teachings will always come from two Grahas based on the statement of Maharishi Jaimini "budha-shaani-bhyaaM viShNau". Maharishi Parasara agrees to this and has stated the same. For this reason if the Vishnu Avatara does in fact incarnate, there WILL be two schools of thought emanating from the same, i.e. one Budha and one Shani. The one emanating from Budha will focus on the karmas of man as Budha is the primary Karaka for the tenth house, whilst the one emanating from Shani will focus on the purity and dushtakarmas of man where many rules and restrictions will have to be met to keep this purity. And this is exactly what happened. Sri Chaitanya established the lineage with the six goswami's in Bengal who follow a strict and very orthodox/conservative path (Shani), and then in Orissa he through the five sakha's re-established a means to follow the four purusharthas + one spiritual path (pancha-mahapurusha yoga). In the latter school we see a clear focus on performing karma which leads to God such as Jyotish, Yantra, Bhakti, Tattva and Agama (further descriptions of their work can be seen in the Shunya Samhita). Looking forward to more writing from you. Maybe the philosophy part is too heavy for this basics-forum, but feel free to otherwise point people towards your further writings. Yours sincerely, Visti Larsen ---------- Jyotish Guru (Vedic Astrologer) www: http://srigaruda.com @: visti (AT) srigaruda (DOT) com RafaÅ‚ Gendarz skrev: hraum krishnaya namah Dear Members , According to Gaudiya Math and Iskcon understanding of Sri Caitanya philosophy the dvaita points refers to being different from God in quantity and advaita means being equal in quality when it comes to Jiva-rupa and Isvara-rupa - this refers to one verse of Gita with the word 'amsa' (part). Isckon and most of Gaudiyas sadhakas will never agree that Sankara's view on advaita can go together with Dvaita. Therefore I cant agree on that perspective of Sri Caitanya philosophy as we see that whole Sri Caitanya-Caritamrta (for example there is verse that if one reads Sankaras commentary then his spiritual life is ruined) and life of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Maharaja/Srila Prabhupada was the philosophical war agaisnt Sankaras Advaita. So this SJC (and some other Vaisnava) view that  - Dvaita-advaita refering to existence in the same time both Dvaita and Sankara Advaita philosphy - is only one interpretation. Normally followers of Sri Caitanya are always against Advaita and I dont agree that if both of them exist in history then there must be equally accurate. In the time of history many opposite views were going together but it doesnt mean they are equally right. When it comes to my understanding only one of this view can be right and for my sraddha its above understanding of Sri Caitanya philosophy. Regards Rafal Gendarz SJC Jyotish Guru -------------- Consultations & Pages http://rohinaa.com rafal (AT) rohinaa (DOT) com Visti Larsen pisze: हरे राम कृषà¥à¤£ Dear Rajarshi, Namaskar. I will not go deep into the concepts of dvaita and advaita but say this: When both these philosophies exist strongly as means to approach God, we cannot say that one is more accurate than the other. Both philosophies have very strong stand points. Its obvious that you believe truly in the Advaita philosophy. Its good that you recognise this in yourself. In the first lesson on the Jaimini Sutras we are taught that everyone believes either in Dvaita and Advaita in truth. And further that we only reach God once we realise both approaches... not just intellectualise them. This is something a bit new and was what Sri Chaitanya was teaching, namely the Dvaita-Advaita approach. Some say this is akin to the teachings of Vyasa and Jaimini. I hope this clarifies. Yours sincerely, Visti Larsen ---------- Jyotish Guru (Vedic Astrologer) www: http://srigaruda.com @: visti (AT) srigaruda (DOT) com rajarshi nandy skrev: Namaste  None of them agreed to this and they pointed out that if God is both dual and non-dual then it is only that the Mahavidya is overcoming our concept of duality or non-duality, whichever is stronger in us.   I can comment on the philosophical point raised in the mail - and I firmly disgree to this. Someone, anyone, who resides in the state of perfect non-duality is already beyond everything, EVERYTHING. Deities, rituals etc etc. So the idea of Mahavidya or anyone helping to overcome non-duality really does not arise, because there is nothing to overcome beyond that. That itself is the final goal, theoritically at least. Few every in the history of sadhaks have touched that state of nonduality being in this physical plane. It is such an idea that it cannot be even talked about because talking involves the mind and this, as they say, is beyond the mind. As long as the mind remains duality remains, once the mind is transcended entirely, it is non dual. So therefore, all these discussion of correlation etc etc and any deity for that matter is firmly in the relam of duality.  -Regards  Rajarshi     The upsurge (of consciousness) is Bhairava - Shiva Sutra --- On Fri, 12/6/09, Visti Larsen <visti (AT) srigaruda (DOT) com> wrote: Visti Larsen <visti (AT) srigaruda (DOT) com> [Om Krishna Guru] Mahavidya, Devata and Graha , sohamsa , jaiminisutra , jaiminiupadesa Friday, 12 June, 2009, 3:14 AM हरे राम कृषà¥à¤£ Dear Narasimha, Sarbani, Arpad et. al, Namaskar. In the entire discussion on Mahavidya and Grahas, I wished to point out that the simplicity with which Narasimha pointed out the Mahavidya and their equivalents was lacking proper comprehension of the concept of Graha and Devata. Two points I saw were mainly lacking. One philosophical and one Jyotish point. Firstly, Narasimha, you equate Mahavidya with: 'she who which helps overcome duality'. I didn't like this explanation yet I took it to myself to ask some Sadhakas who have practised Mahavidya mantras for the last couple of years. None of them agreed to this and they pointed out that if God is both dual and non-dual then it is only that the Mahavidya is overcoming our concept of duality or non-duality, whichever is stronger in us. This made me understand that your statement is solely in the eyes of the beholder... in this case you or the one who told you this. My next point is linked to this. Secondly, Narasimha, the means through which you linked the Mahavidya to the Graha is very far away from any way that I have seen Grahas and Devata linked. Lets take something simple, i.e. Why is Sun equated to Shiva? Really Sun is not Shiva, how can we say that the cooling and soothing Shiva mantras are like that hot hot Sun? Impossible really. At most you can say that Agni is the closest equivalent to the Sun or Suryadeva himself. In truth we are all taught that in the Pancha Devata puja that Shiva purifies and balances the Vayu Tattva and therefore also symbolises the strength of the Maruts which he is always so closely linked to in the Puranas. Because of this some astrologers TEND to equate Shiva with Shani as he is able to overcome the worst Vaata-disturbances, calm the mind and also remove all fears and sorrow, but that doesn't mean that Shiva is Shani but does have the power to overcome the Tattva that Shani represents. This by no means implies that we can prescribe Shiva mantras for all Shani problems, not at all. Nor does it mean that Rudraksha is advised by the Rishis for all Devata represented by Surya, far from it. So again, how did Shiva get equated with Surya when we came to the Graha level? It is because Shiva is able to enlighten the self of its true identity and since the Sun represents this self or Atma as an individual (vayu causes separation), Shiva SHOULD be worshipped to correct this main issue with the self. Its good for you to worship Shiva to overcome these issues with (non)duality. You know this, so why didn't you think in similar terms with the Mahavidya? i.e. What is the purpose of the Mahavidya and what is the Mother really doing to us? You could have stuck to iconography (sva/lagna-approach ) of the Mahavidya and then surely gone wrong but at least come to something useful. I.e. Rahu represents the female widower and hence Dhumavati SHOULD be represented by Rahu, whilst Ketu represents the one depicted without a head one and therefore SHOULD at a very base level be represented by Ketu. Again note that we are sticking to iconography here. But, we are not looking for Graha-representatio n as this cannot be within the concept of Mahavidya. Mahavidya implies at its root that there is some vidya and some a-vidya and the Mahavidya is giving complete knowledge of all of these and also correcting wrong vidya (another way of looking at a-vidya). In the first year of Jaimini Sutras (feel free to listen to it online) we are taught that the concept of Avidya is linked to Badhaka, a principle enforced by the words of Harihara, author of Prasna Marga. Using this understanding, principally Ketu is corrected by the Mahavidya whose iconography resembles Rahu, and therefore only Dhumavati is worshipped to overcome the A-vidya of Ketu. This concept was revealed to a select few of us in Vineland, New Jersey in the summer of 2003. Similarly, you will hear statements such as, the worship of Tarini makes one the best student (Mercury), and the worship of Tripurasundari makes one able to continue the Sampradaya (Jupiter), and therefore ALL traditions of India stay alive due to the worship of Sri Tripurasundari. Yet, in practice Tripurasundari is advised to correct the faults of Mercury and Tarini is worshipped to correct the faults of Jupiter, and thereby enable the relationship of the teacher and student to be the best... again see that Mercury and Jupiter are natural Badhaka's to each other in the charts. This implies that Mahavidya is really a means of removing the natural Badhaka of the Graha as that is the place of A-vidya of that Graha. We affectionately say that Tarini is the Mother of Jupiter and that Tripura is the Mother if Mercury... but is not Mercury. Maharishi Vashishta, father of Shakta and grandfather of Maharishi Parashara, worshipped Sri Tarini Devi for thousands of years, as described in the Tara Tantra, to attain the fruit of good children. He had suffered on account of the demise of his son Shakta, and the direct lineage was broken. It was because of Tara's blessing that he attained an illustrious progeny which we today consider the fountain head of all knowledge of spirituality. So, should one question the age and practice of the Mahavidya's, we can go very very far back. This further confirms that Sri Tarini is worshipped to correct the flaws in Jupiter and is therefore appropriately praised as Sri Kuleshvari by many. Further, in practice ladies and men with great blockages and doshas with respect to children have seen all such problems removed through the worship of Sri Tarini confirming this. Should we then go into how the Grahas are linked to Jyotirlingas or even Avataras? Point is that simple justification will not suffice to describe the Devata's and brings the lists given without such consideration to much question. I hope my points will bring clarity to teachers and students alike. Yours sincerely, Visti Larsen ------------ --------- --------- --------- ---- Jyotish Guru (Vedic Astrologer) www: http://srigaruda. com @: visti (AT) srigaruda (DOT) com Explore and discover exciting holidays and getaways with India Travel Click here! 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.