Guest guest Posted October 23, 2008 Report Share Posted October 23, 2008 , " sriram " <sriram_sapthasathi wrote: > Because > every vaidika mantra should be replaced with either Tripura Bhairavi > or Bhairava. For example: > > The achamana is " apah punantu ……tripura bhairavim svaha " . The Vishnu > mantra for karma kanda " idam vishnurvichakrame…… " is replaced with > Bhairava. The offering of udaka is offering with Tripura Bhairavi > ie., " drupadat iva munchatu …..tripura bhairavim " . Gayatri mantra is > suffixed with Tripura Bhairavi. Arghya is offered to surya with " maha > bhairavaya suryaya idam arghyam samarpayami " . The tarpana is " brahma > bhairavam tarpayami " . Pitri tarpanam is " svapitaram bhairavam " > and " tripyatam pitaram bhairavah " . And the rest of the tarpanas > should be done with Bhairava Namavalih. Some of these are used to perform tAntric sandhya but where is it said that to perform above you need to leave vaidika karma? If a brAhmaNa has time he does both the vadika and tAntrika sandhya if it is not possible the vadika sandhya is important for him and he does just that. Take the case of siddhAnta shaiva-s who perform all their brahmanical rituals in addition to the shaiva rituals. > So, the smarta who is doing this sort of upasana IS PROHIBITED FROM > PERFORMING the sandhya anushtana, deva panchayatana, vaisvadeva, > brahma yajna, pancha paka yajna and sapta havir yajnas and kratus. Same as above. What is the pramAna for this? Because of the nature of this issue we need to know exactly from which tantra is the quotation coming from. I am stressing this because because most of the stuff quoted to prove above comes from recent or late mediveal tantric works influenced by vedantins from shankara school. > Now, the misra-achara crept in because these smartas took certain > things for granted like soma pana in sautramani, mamsa bhakshana in > vapa yajna and maithuna in one of the kratus. There was a mixture of > these vaidika acharas and kaula tantras among the Smartas and landed > in soup and utter confusion. soma pAna, mAmsa bhakShana etc did not creep in. They are there from ancient times long before the so called tAntric literature precipitated. What is reference for this? - see shrauta works. > A KAULA BRAHMANA LOSES HIS KULA & JANMA GOTRA WHICH IS A MUST FOR > VEDIC KARMANUSHTANA. That a brAhmaNa should lose his kula and janma gotra to follow kaula rituals: Isnt it more like an option than a rule? > AMONG THE " SHISHTA VAMACHARIS " OF SMARTAS, THERE EVOLVED A BRANCH > WHICH TRIED TO REFORM THE LEFTIST PATH TO SUIT THEIR REQUIREMENTS > (WHO DID NOT WANT TO LOSE THEIR IDENTITY OF BRAHMINS) WHICH APPROVED > THE DUTI YAGA WITH SVA-STRI ETC. Where is the need to lose their brAhmaNa identity? They took what is good in the system and left those elements which are opposed to their value systems. There are works which mentioned that someone following the kaula path will lose the gotra etc. For every one statment in the tantra-s like this, you will find the exact opposite being said in some other tantra. So people have a tendency to quote selectively for what they wanted to prove. As an example, there are smriti-s/paurANic statment which say tripundra dhArana is a sin and others which say it is a virtue. So will you take this statement and stop making tripundra marks on your forehead? No we dont do that. Same is the case here. Just because one or two tantra-s had statments saying those initiated into kaula mArga will lose their brAhmana identity, that is not the end of teh story. Furthermore, if some tantric work says those who follow vadika and kaula rituals both, attain the fruits of none, what does anyone's common sense tell him? That the work which says that came after a time when people have been doing this for sometime/longtime--no? Why give such importance to small controversial statments from late works? A kaula identity is some thing made, while a brahmana identity is something one *partly* acquires by birth. So one will only lose it when doing something forbidden. And the texts do not forbid kaula rituals because these kaula rituals came long after the smritis(not all) were formulated. It is because of this, that those who substitute 5m do not lose their brAhmana identity. If kaula rituals grant quick siddhi, then adopt them without violating the brahminical norms. What is there to feel guilty about it as long as no smArta norm is violated? If you feel that is not your path or if you still cant break the shell around you that years of mental-conditioning created, then express so but kindly do not preach it as some universal truth to be followed by everyone(even within the brAhmaNa circles). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 23, 2008 Report Share Posted October 23, 2008 What do you mean by " time " ? Tantrika sandhya is for purnabhishiktas. So, again back to square one. Siddhanta Shaiva is against the srutis and sankara has condemned this. For rest of the doubts, pl. refer " savyApasya margasthA' of bhaskara commentary. as for now, i stop here. , " Satish " <satisharigela wrote: > > , " sriram " <sriram_sapthasathi@> > wrote: > > Because > > every vaidika mantra should be replaced with either Tripura > Bhairavi > > or Bhairava. For example: > > > > The achamana is " apah punantu ……tripura bhairavim svaha " . The > Vishnu > > mantra for karma kanda " idam vishnurvichakrame…… " is replaced with > > Bhairava. The offering of udaka is offering with Tripura Bhairavi > > ie., " drupadat iva munchatu …..tripura bhairavim " . Gayatri mantra > is > > suffixed with Tripura Bhairavi. Arghya is offered to surya > with " maha > > bhairavaya suryaya idam arghyam samarpayami " . The tarpana > is " brahma > > bhairavam tarpayami " . Pitri tarpanam is " svapitaram bhairavam " > > and " tripyatam pitaram bhairavah " . And the rest of the tarpanas > > should be done with Bhairava Namavalih. > > Some of these are used to perform tAntric sandhya but where is it > said that to perform above you need to leave vaidika karma? If a > brAhmaNa has time he does both the vadika and tAntrika sandhya if it > is not possible the vadika sandhya is important for him and he does > just that. > > Take the case of siddhAnta shaiva-s who perform all their brahmanical > rituals in addition to the shaiva rituals. > > > > So, the smarta who is doing this sort of upasana IS PROHIBITED FROM > > PERFORMING the sandhya anushtana, deva panchayatana, vaisvadeva, > > brahma yajna, pancha paka yajna and sapta havir yajnas and kratus. > > Same as above. What is the pramAna for this? Because of the nature of > this issue we need to know exactly from which tantra is the quotation > coming from. I am stressing this because because most of the stuff > quoted to prove above comes from recent or late mediveal tantric > works influenced by vedantins from shankara school. > > > > Now, the misra-achara crept in because these smartas took certain > > things for granted like soma pana in sautramani, mamsa bhakshana in > > vapa yajna and maithuna in one of the kratus. There was a mixture > of > > these vaidika acharas and kaula tantras among the Smartas and > landed > > in soup and utter confusion. > > soma pAna, mAmsa bhakShana etc did not creep in. They are there from > ancient times long before the so called tAntric literature > precipitated. What is reference for this? - see shrauta works. > > > > A KAULA BRAHMANA LOSES HIS KULA & JANMA GOTRA WHICH IS A MUST FOR > > VEDIC KARMANUSHTANA. > > That a brAhmaNa should lose his kula and janma gotra to follow kaula > rituals: Isnt it more like an option than a rule? > > > > > AMONG THE " SHISHTA VAMACHARIS " OF SMARTAS, THERE EVOLVED A BRANCH > > WHICH TRIED TO REFORM THE LEFTIST PATH TO SUIT THEIR REQUIREMENTS > > (WHO DID NOT WANT TO LOSE THEIR IDENTITY OF BRAHMINS) WHICH > APPROVED > > THE DUTI YAGA WITH SVA-STRI ETC. > > > Where is the need to lose their brAhmaNa identity? > They took what is good in the system and left those elements which > are opposed to their value systems. > > There are works which mentioned that someone following the kaula path > will lose the gotra etc. For every one statment in the tantra-s like > this, you will find the exact opposite being said in some other > tantra. So people have a tendency to quote selectively for what they > wanted to prove. > > As an example, there are smriti-s/paurANic statment which say > tripundra dhArana is a sin and others which say it is a virtue. So > will you take this statement and stop making tripundra marks on your > forehead? No we dont do that. Same is the case here. Just because one > or two tantra-s had statments saying those initiated into kaula mArga > will lose their brAhmana identity, that is not the end of teh story. > > Furthermore, if some tantric work says those who follow vadika and > kaula rituals both, attain the fruits of none, what does anyone's > common sense tell him? That the work which says that came after a > time when people have been doing this for sometime/longtime--no? Why > give such importance to small controversial statments from late works? > > A kaula identity is some thing made, while a brahmana identity is > something one *partly* acquires by birth. So one will only lose it > when doing something forbidden. And the texts do not forbid kaula > rituals because these kaula rituals came long after the smritis(not > all) were formulated. It is because of this, that those who > substitute 5m do not lose their brAhmana identity. If kaula rituals > grant quick siddhi, then adopt them without violating the brahminical > norms. What is there to feel guilty about it as long as no smArta > norm is violated? > > If you feel that is not your path or if you still cant break the > shell around you that years of mental-conditioning created, then > express so but kindly do not preach it as some universal truth to be > followed by everyone(even within the brAhmaNa circles). > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 23, 2008 Report Share Posted October 23, 2008 I agree that Sri Satishji should address the fundamental difference and not matter of convenience adopted by some. Regards, Anbu On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 2:37 AM, sriram <sriram_sapthasathiwrote: > What do you mean by " time " ? Tantrika sandhya is for purnabhishiktas. > So, again back to square one. > > Siddhanta Shaiva is against the srutis and sankara has condemned this. > > For rest of the doubts, pl. refer " savyApasya margasthA' of bhaskara > commentary. > > as for now, i stop here. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 23, 2008 Report Share Posted October 23, 2008 , " sriram " <sriram_sapthasathi wrote: > For rest of the doubts, pl. refer " savyApasya margasthA' of bhaskara > commentary. I just referred and it confirms what you said. So this portion is clear.He quoted many verses from the kAlikA purANa explaining this point saying how the various devata-s will be replaced by the iShTa devata. Moxa is not denied here but it seems there will be some delay for a dvija who takes up the vAmA mArga.** I will also draw attention to portions of Netra tantra where the yearly ritual done to Indra on behalf of the king by the brAhmaNa -rAja- purohita is performed to indrarUpI-Amritesha Bhairava by the shaiva- purohita. Technically both belong to the brAhmaNa community. This explains why many brAhmaNa-s dont take up vAmA mArga per se but only learn their rituals without the sort of affiliation(i.e. replacing vadika devata-s with iShTa, changes in tarpana etc) spoken of here. This is also the reason why we have families of the first varNa who mastered these shaiva/vAma-rituals but yet remain shrauti-s. However do note that the initial pont of discussion where vAmA is portrayed as being fit only for sAdhaka-s classified as having pashu- bhAva is still not accurate. See, no issues on agreeing with things when there is proper pramana. ** It is interesting to note that moxa is still assured here eventhough with some delay. Rgds Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 23, 2008 Report Share Posted October 23, 2008 Dear satish, Namaste. I beg the pardon i have hurt you. But i am happy that we have come to a conclusion. Moreover, i have just called up Sringeri Mutt Samsthan Srividyopasaka Shri Narahari Bhatt. He said that they use Patra Sthapana and also use Nagara Khanda as a substitute. So, that clears my doubt. But they have reservations against Tantrika Sandhyavandana which is exclusively for Shaktas and they donot perform it. So, there are difference in guru sampradaya and one should stick to it. Once again my heartfelt thanks to you and Shri Narahari Bhatt of Sringeri. with regards, sriram , " Satish " <satisharigela wrote: > > , " sriram " <sriram_sapthasathi@> wrote: > > > For rest of the doubts, pl. refer " savyApasya margasthA' of bhaskara > > commentary. > > I just referred and it confirms what you said. So this portion is > clear.He quoted many verses from the kAlikA purANa explaining this > point saying how the various devata-s will be replaced by the iShTa > devata. Moxa is not denied here but it seems there will be some delay > for a dvija who takes up the vAmA mArga.** > > I will also draw attention to portions of Netra tantra where the yearly > ritual done to Indra on behalf of the king by the brAhmaNa -rAja- > purohita is performed to indrarUpI-Amritesha Bhairava by the shaiva- > purohita. Technically both belong to the brAhmaNa community. > > This explains why many brAhmaNa-s dont take up vAmA mArga per se but > only learn their rituals without the sort of affiliation(i.e. replacing > vadika devata-s with iShTa, changes in tarpana etc) spoken of here. > This is also the reason why we have families of the first varNa who > mastered these shaiva/vAma-rituals but yet remain shrauti-s. > > However do note that the initial pont of discussion where vAmA is > portrayed as being fit only for sAdhaka-s classified as having pashu- > bhAva is still not accurate. See, no issues on agreeing with things > when there is proper pramana. > > ** It is interesting to note that moxa is still assured here eventhough > with some delay. > > Rgds > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 24, 2008 Report Share Posted October 24, 2008 My dear Sriram: I have a question. You say shri Bhatt uses Naagara Khanda as a SUBSTITUTE. So the original is real McCoy right? The substitution could have taken place only subsequently, right? So what was the original and why was substitution made? Was it social necessity or social mores in a changed circumstances? [namaste- the substitutions came because the original items violated the post-buddha norms of the smArta-s. To avoid that, substitutions were made-satish] --- On Thu, 10/23/08, sriram <sriram_sapthasathi wrote: sriram <sriram_sapthasathi Re: Exclusion from vadika rituals Thursday, October 23, 2008, 9:34 PM Dear satish, Namaste. I beg the pardon i have hurt you. But i am happy that we have come to a conclusion. Moreover, i have just called up Sringeri Mutt Samsthan Srividyopasaka Shri Narahari Bhatt. He said that they use Patra Sthapana and also use Nagara Khanda as a substitute. So, that clears my doubt. But they have reservations against Tantrika Sandhyavandana which is exclusively for Shaktas and they donot perform it. So, there are difference in guru sampradaya and one should stick to it. Once again my heartfelt thanks to you and Shri Narahari Bhatt of Sringeri. with regards, sriram Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 24, 2008 Report Share Posted October 24, 2008 Dear sir, That is why i have said that i have reservations against patra sthapana. Names of some of the srividya upasakas whom i have mentioned did not use patra sthapana. Even my gurunatha. All of them were nityagnihotris. My concern is why the Kalpa Sutras are twisted as per one's own conveniences & requirements when Shubha Agama Panchaka is available, if not completely, at least partly. Kalpa Sutra, per se, is compiled for 4th varna. A sadachari should never think of maithuna and other stuff during the worship (even the substitution part also). regs, sriram , sankara menon <kochu1tz wrote: > > My dear Sriram: > I have a question. > You say shri Bhatt uses Naagara Khanda as a SUBSTITUTE. So the original is real McCoy right? The substitution could have taken place only subsequently, right? So what was the original and why was substitution made? > Was it social necessity or social mores in a changed circumstances? > > [namaste- the substitutions came because the original items violated the post-buddha norms of the smArta-s. To avoid that, substitutions were made-satish] > > --- On Thu, 10/23/08, sriram <sriram_sapthasathi wrote: > > sriram <sriram_sapthasathi > Re: Exclusion from vadika rituals > > Thursday, October 23, 2008, 9:34 PM > > > Dear satish, > > Namaste. I beg the pardon i have hurt you. But i am happy that we > have come to a conclusion. Moreover, i have just called up Sringeri > Mutt Samsthan Srividyopasaka Shri Narahari Bhatt. > > He said that they use Patra Sthapana and also use Nagara Khanda as a > substitute. So, that clears my doubt. But they have reservations > against Tantrika Sandhyavandana which is exclusively for Shaktas and > they donot perform it. > > So, there are difference in guru sampradaya and one should stick to > it. > > Once again my heartfelt thanks to you and Shri Narahari Bhatt of > Sringeri. > > with regards, > sriram > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 24, 2008 Report Share Posted October 24, 2008 , " sriram " <sriram_sapthasathi wrote: > My concern is why the Kalpa Sutras are twisted as per one's own > conveniences & requirements when Shubha Agama Panchaka is available, > if not completely, at least partly. That is because the so called shubhAgama pa~nchaka is of late provenance. People are of the opinion that came into existence either during or after lakShmIdhara. This is not an original work on shrIvidya. Consider the following objections by a learned freind of mine. ------- Regarding the shubhAgama pa~nchaka (shp): They are a controversial topic. The below view is mine, and you may find people violently object to it if they belong to the extreme samaya path or are close the prescriptions of certain authorities from shaMkara maThas. Followers of what may be called the extreme samaya path believe that the only real authorities on tantric worship available to a brahmin are : 1) veda 2)dharma shAstras and 3) the shp or the five texts attributed to vasiShTha, parAshara, shUka, sanaka, sanatkumAra and sanandana. I am yet to see a complete text of any of these five works, though they might exist in manuscript form in Orissa. They are generally held in utmost secret by the practioners of samaya path of shrividya and known only to those who have gone beyond the level of initiation of highly guarded mantras known as the ShoDashi or the mahAShoDashi. However, despite their high prestige with the samayins they are really not cited by most of the ancient shrividya manuals which instead draw from the shrikula tantras. The beginnings of shrividya are so firmly embedded in shrikula tantras (like the great tantrarAja and vAmakeshvara= nityAShodashikArNava + yoginIhR^idaya for example) and their rituals that the shubhAgama pa~nchaka sort of seems out of place in this setting. The great goddess is always referred to as kaulinI or identified with the kulayoginI. Thus, it appears likely that the extreme view that the shp is the only valid canon for the samayins is a late innovation. However, from the existing fragments it appears that the shubhAgama was culled together from ancient shrividya texts by moving away to the extant possible from the kaula krama. I would consider them a late regional innovation that occurred in eith Varanasi or Orissa just prior to the reign of Prataparudra Gajapati which was then actively fostered by the shaMkara Matha and South Indian practioners. In my opinion the followers of the shubhAgama's main objection that pa~ncha makara is against the sanction of the shruti (ultimate authority for an Arya) is not exactly true. Hence, I do not believe that the kaula path is anti-Vedic or unfit for brAhmaNas. However, I personally do not employ pa~ncha makara, but only take their esoteric significance. We of course follow the great vAmAchAra teacher, bhAskararAya makhIndra, who a great vedic ritualist and knower of the atharvaNa shruti. He pointed out that there is really no need for a sectarian debate between samaya and kaula paths and that a shrauta ritualist may follow the esoteric aspect of the kaula path without the actual makaras (after all she is bahirmukha durlabhA, and one can easily go down false leads by actually using makaras without the correct initiation, temperment and knowledge). The great bhAskararAya has explained this point sufficiently to nArAyaNa bhaTTa in Varanasi. So the view that the shubhAgamas are the only texts to be followed by Brahmins is not necessarily correct or even the older view. 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.