Guest guest Posted September 28, 2005 Report Share Posted September 28, 2005 Nora, Mary Ann is obsessed with the idea of androgyny. And I must agree that the Soul has no gender, and that we are souls incarnating for innumerable times into various bodies both male and female. It is mind-expanding to play with the exchange of gender-roles, which are superimposed by our individual societies. But while we are incarnated, we have been dealt a body which (usually) has one gender or another. Very few of us are actually Ardhanarishvaras. And most societies get very edgy when people try to blurr the distinctions between genders. (Witness the stupid Defense of Marriage legislation going on in the USA!) I await the brouhaha that will ensue when science discovers a means for cloned fetuses to be nurtured inside a man's body. Until that time, it may be argued that the only activity that the genders can't share is childbirth. The good people of Nepal are unlikely to agree with Mary Ann: Why, yes, let's have young boys portray Kumari sometimes, and have young girls portray Bhairava! I'd be much more concerned that ALL women (in Nepal, or elsewhere) be treated with respect and allowed to earn an honest living, without being abused by fathers, husbands, sons or brothers. When rights are equal, we can address the blurring of societal gender roles. -- Len/ Kalipadma --- NMadasamy <nmadasamy wrote: > , "Mary Ann" > <buttercookie61> wrote: > > I think it would also be beneficial for the roles > to be > > interchangeable between male and female, rather > than one always > > representing Bhairava, one always representing > Kumari. This would be > > in keeping with Ardhanarashwari/a, it would seem. > > > > What makes women different from man [1] women > menstruate [2] women > have the womb. The most powerful symbol of shakti is > the yoni. > > The yoni does not know any distinction between > husband, brothers, > sons ,relations and caste. The yoni is govern by > one: The act of > creation. Any seed you plant it grows into life. > That is the power of > the yoni, in its ability to cause social > instability. In any form of > Shakti Worship, the worship of DEVI in a human body > is the most > powerful. > > Perhaps we should go back to our basic and ask the > question : What is > Tantra? > > > > > Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 28, 2005 Report Share Posted September 28, 2005 , Len Rosenberg <kalipadma108> wrote: > > But while we are incarnated, we have been dealt a body > which (usually) has one gender or another. Very few > of us are actually Ardhanarishvaras. Len, Do you have specific examples of such ardha-narishwaras, or are you alluding that all realized people are essentially ardha-narishwara? Jai Ma! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 28, 2005 Report Share Posted September 28, 2005 Len, your first paragraph below sounds like an argument for S&M. Everyone of us is the Ardhanarashwari/a, from my understanding of the deity's symbolism. I feel that until the female is accepted within the male, and the male accepted within the female, the outer respect you say you want for women in the world cannot happen. When the gender roles stay static in rituals and in society, it does not further the recognition and acceptance of the fullness of human qualities in each human being, but continues projections outward onto the genders that hinder growth, that cause rigidity, or armoring, to use a Reichian term. , Len Rosenberg <kalipadma108> wrote: > > Nora, Mary Ann is obsessed with the idea of androgyny. > And I must agree that the Soul has no gender, and > that we are souls incarnating for innumerable times > into various bodies both male and female. It is > mind-expanding to play with the exchange of > gender-roles, which are superimposed by our individual > societies. > > But while we are incarnated, we have been dealt a body > which (usually) has one gender or another. Very few > of us are actually Ardhanarishvaras. And most > societies get very edgy when people try to blurr the > distinctions between genders. (Witness the stupid > Defense of Marriage legislation going on in the USA!) > > I await the brouhaha that will ensue when science > discovers a means for cloned fetuses to be nurtured > inside a man's body. Until that time, it may be > argued that the only activity that the genders can't > share is childbirth. > > The good people of Nepal are unlikely to agree with > Mary Ann: Why, yes, let's have young boys portray > Kumari sometimes, and have young girls portray > Bhairava! > > I'd be much more concerned that ALL women (in Nepal, > or elsewhere) be treated with respect and allowed to > earn an honest living, without being abused by > fathers, husbands, sons or brothers. When rights are > equal, we can address the blurring of societal gender > roles. > > -- Len/ Kalipadma > > > --- NMadasamy <nmadasamy@s...> > wrote: > > > , "Mary Ann" > > <buttercookie61> wrote: > > > I think it would also be beneficial for the roles > > to be > > > interchangeable between male and female, rather > > than one always > > > representing Bhairava, one always representing > > Kumari. This would be > > > in keeping with Ardhanarashwari/a, it would seem. > > > > > > > > What makes women different from man [1] women > > menstruate [2] women > > have the womb. The most powerful symbol of shakti is > > the yoni. > > > > The yoni does not know any distinction between > > husband, brothers, > > sons ,relations and caste. The yoni is govern by > > one: The act of > > creation. Any seed you plant it grows into life. > > That is the power of > > the yoni, in its ability to cause social > > instability. In any form of > > Shakti Worship, the worship of DEVI in a human body > > is the most > > powerful. > > > > Perhaps we should go back to our basic and ask the > > question : What is > > Tantra? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 28, 2005 Report Share Posted September 28, 2005 I would simply ask that everyone refrain from ridiculing one another as a method of argument. I respect the participants in this debate, and have no desire to play the heavy and start moderating discussions that touch only tangentially on the topic of this group. Unexciting and unimaginative as it may seem, this is simply a spiritual forum. In Shaktism, all of these deities you're discussing are not considered as mere symbols or archetypes to use for our own psychological or societal objectives. They are real -- "realer," one could argue, than any human being, because they are eternal rather than transient energy manifestations -- and, if we let them, they will obligingly help us to expand beyond the limits of our physical egos, bodies and minds. That is the purpose of sadhana, after all! Now, if someone finds these deities to be useful symbols and archetypes in other fields of interest and inquiry, that is fine -- but it is not Shakti Sadhana; it is not what this group is about. It is, I would venture, a bit akin to using a brand-new, state-of-the- art computer as a doorstop rather than turning it on and seeing what its potentials really are. That is not to say I condemn someone who uses a new PC as a doorstop; it holds doors open just fine. My only question is, why not put it to the use it was intended for? Why limit the unlimitable by trying to hold it within the confines of our limited reality? It defeats the whole purpose! Again, the raison d'etre of this group is to discuss sadhana, as pedestrian and bourgeoise as that may seem to some. I would ask that our discussions address that goal. And I would even dare suggest that, if we let the deities perform as they wish rather than as we wish them too, our more earthbound conflicts, confusions and concerns will begin falling into place with twice the efficiency and half the effort. Then again, I might be full of sacred cow manure. You never know. Take it or leave it, as you wish ... ;-) DB , "Mary Ann" <buttercookie61> wrote: > Len, your first paragraph below sounds like an argument for S&M. > Everyone of us is the Ardhanarashwari/a, from my understanding of > the deity's symbolism. I feel that until the female is accepted > within the male, and the male accepted within the female, the outer > respect you say you want for women in the world cannot happen. When > the gender roles stay static in rituals and in society, it does not > further the recognition and acceptance of the fullness of human > qualities in each human being, but continues projections outward > onto the genders that hinder growth, that cause rigidity, or > armoring, to use a Reichian term. > > , Len Rosenberg > <kalipadma108> wrote: > > > > Nora, Mary Ann is obsessed with the idea of androgyny. > > And I must agree that the Soul has no gender, and > > that we are souls incarnating for innumerable times > > into various bodies both male and female. It is > > mind-expanding to play with the exchange of > > gender-roles, which are superimposed by our individual > > societies. > > > > But while we are incarnated, we have been dealt a body > > which (usually) has one gender or another. Very few > > of us are actually Ardhanarishvaras. And most > > societies get very edgy when people try to blurr the > > distinctions between genders. (Witness the stupid > > Defense of Marriage legislation going on in the USA!) > > > > I await the brouhaha that will ensue when science > > discovers a means for cloned fetuses to be nurtured > > inside a man's body. Until that time, it may be > > argued that the only activity that the genders can't > > share is childbirth. > > > > The good people of Nepal are unlikely to agree with > > Mary Ann: Why, yes, let's have young boys portray > > Kumari sometimes, and have young girls portray > > Bhairava! > > > > I'd be much more concerned that ALL women (in Nepal, > > or elsewhere) be treated with respect and allowed to > > earn an honest living, without being abused by > > fathers, husbands, sons or brothers. When rights are > > equal, we can address the blurring of societal gender > > roles. > > > > -- Len/ Kalipadma > > > > > > --- NMadasamy <nmadasamy@s...> > > wrote: > > > > > , "Mary Ann" > > > <buttercookie61> wrote: > > > > I think it would also be beneficial for the roles > > > to be > > > > interchangeable between male and female, rather > > > than one always > > > > representing Bhairava, one always representing > > > Kumari. This would be > > > > in keeping with Ardhanarashwari/a, it would seem. > > > > > > > > > > > > What makes women different from man [1] women > > > menstruate [2] women > > > have the womb. The most powerful symbol of shakti is > > > the yoni. > > > > > > The yoni does not know any distinction between > > > husband, brothers, > > > sons ,relations and caste. The yoni is govern by > > > one: The act of > > > creation. Any seed you plant it grows into life. > > > That is the power of > > > the yoni, in its ability to cause social > > > instability. In any form of > > > Shakti Worship, the worship of DEVI in a human body > > > is the most > > > powerful. > > > > > > Perhaps we should go back to our basic and ask the > > > question : What is > > > Tantra? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 28, 2005 Report Share Posted September 28, 2005 Dear Menon: I think you misunderstood the context of Len's comment. I believe he was making a lighthearted point about the absurdity of holding these conversations strictly at the level of the physical kosha: "Very few of us are actually Ardhanarishvaras" thus suggesting that "very few of us are actually born as physical hermaphrodites." Your second question, however, hits the nail on the head: "Are you alluding that all realized people are essentially ardha-narishwara?" Indeed they are -- which is really the point of my previous post as well, for what it's worth. DB , "manoj_menon" <ammademon@g...> wrote: > , Len Rosenberg > <kalipadma108> wrote: > > > > But while we are incarnated, we have been dealt a body > > which (usually) has one gender or another. Very few > > of us are actually Ardhanarishvaras. > > Len, > > Do you have specific examples of such ardha-narishwaras, or are you > alluding that all realized people are essentially ardha-narishwara? > > Jai Ma! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 28, 2005 Report Share Posted September 28, 2005 Yes i agree to talk only about the physical body is misleading. It is traditional teaching in some if not all tantric lineages i know that the subtle koshas are subject to change as much as the physical body the so called higher bodies are not at all higher in a sense of better or more refined they are as much subject to change as the physical body they age and wither, and do also desintegrate just a somewaht later (after death) than the physical body and that they are therefore all to be treated alike (as of an impermanent nature) All the koshas and worlds perceived as subtle or physical are in the same distance from the axis of the wheel (the goal of sadhana) In fact in my opinion the very Essence of Kaula Knowledge is non dual. The existence of a difference or duality betwenn spiritual and physical is perceived in mainstream religion that postpones enlightment after death. The aim of tantra is to attain while living in this very body not after death. The teaching of all the Siddhas beginning with Matsyendranth up to today was centered around this physical body and all the other bodies and their identification with the deities and their powers and their ultimate transmogrification into Immortality in a body melted in unity aand hardened by sadhana that cannot be destroyed by fire water or any other element and even withstands the final conflageration at the end of the Kalpa. (the techinques used are hatha Yoga, Inner and outer Alchemy, use of erotic energies, meditation yantras mantras and medicines) Kaula vidya is a Science that is as much physical as subtle but is definetly nondual (it also establishes no duality betweenn physical and subtle levels) As long as this duality is perceived the interesting part of the sadhana cannot begin. , "Devi Bhakta" <devi_bhakta> wrote: .. I believe he > was making a lighthearted point about the absurdity of holding these conversations strictly at the level of the physical kosha" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 28, 2005 Report Share Posted September 28, 2005 For me, Sadhana is how I live my life, not just a separate "spiritual" pursuit. I was quoting something I read of Amma's regarding what the Ardharashwari/a symbolizes. In her Awakening Universal Motherhood booklet, she says (and I paraphrase, though I may already have quoted this in an earlier post) that ancient Indian sages knew that human beings are both male and female and that is what the Ardhanarashara/i symbolizes, or represents, something like that. , "Devi Bhakta" <devi_bhakta> wrote: > I would simply ask that everyone refrain from ridiculing one another > as a method of argument. I respect the participants in this debate, > and have no desire to play the heavy and start moderating > discussions that touch only tangentially on the topic of this group. > > Unexciting and unimaginative as it may seem, this is > simply a spiritual forum. In Shaktism, all of these deities you're > discussing are not considered as mere symbols or archetypes to use > for our own psychological or societal objectives. They are real -- > "realer," one could argue, than any human being, because they are > eternal rather than transient energy manifestations -- and, if we > let them, they will obligingly help us to expand beyond the limits > of our physical egos, bodies and minds. > > That is the purpose of sadhana, after all! > > Now, if someone finds these deities to be useful symbols and > archetypes in other fields of interest and inquiry, that is fine -- > but it is not Shakti Sadhana; it is not what this group is about. It > is, I would venture, a bit akin to using a brand-new, state-of-the- > art computer as a doorstop rather than turning it on and seeing what > its potentials really are. That is not to say I condemn someone who > uses a new PC as a doorstop; it holds doors open just fine. My only > question is, why not put it to the use it was intended for? Why > limit the unlimitable by trying to hold it within the confines of > our limited reality? It defeats the whole purpose! > > Again, the raison d'etre of this group is to discuss sadhana, as > pedestrian and bourgeoise as that may seem to some. I would ask that > our discussions address that goal. And I would even dare suggest > that, if we let the deities perform as they wish rather than as we > wish them too, our more earthbound conflicts, confusions and > concerns will begin falling into place with twice the efficiency and > half the effort. > > Then again, I might be full of sacred cow manure. You never know. > Take it or leave it, as you wish ... ;-) > > DB > > > , "Mary Ann" > <buttercookie61> wrote: > > Len, your first paragraph below sounds like an argument for S&M. > > Everyone of us is the Ardhanarashwari/a, from my understanding of > > the deity's symbolism. I feel that until the female is accepted > > within the male, and the male accepted within the female, the > outer > > respect you say you want for women in the world cannot happen. > When > > the gender roles stay static in rituals and in society, it does > not > > further the recognition and acceptance of the fullness of human > > qualities in each human being, but continues projections outward > > onto the genders that hinder growth, that cause rigidity, or > > armoring, to use a Reichian term. > > > > , Len Rosenberg > > <kalipadma108> wrote: > > > > > > Nora, Mary Ann is obsessed with the idea of androgyny. > > > And I must agree that the Soul has no gender, and > > > that we are souls incarnating for innumerable times > > > into various bodies both male and female. It is > > > mind-expanding to play with the exchange of > > > gender-roles, which are superimposed by our individual > > > societies. > > > > > > But while we are incarnated, we have been dealt a body > > > which (usually) has one gender or another. Very few > > > of us are actually Ardhanarishvaras. And most > > > societies get very edgy when people try to blurr the > > > distinctions between genders. (Witness the stupid > > > Defense of Marriage legislation going on in the USA!) > > > > > > I await the brouhaha that will ensue when science > > > discovers a means for cloned fetuses to be nurtured > > > inside a man's body. Until that time, it may be > > > argued that the only activity that the genders can't > > > share is childbirth. > > > > > > The good people of Nepal are unlikely to agree with > > > Mary Ann: Why, yes, let's have young boys portray > > > Kumari sometimes, and have young girls portray > > > Bhairava! > > > > > > I'd be much more concerned that ALL women (in Nepal, > > > or elsewhere) be treated with respect and allowed to > > > earn an honest living, without being abused by > > > fathers, husbands, sons or brothers. When rights are > > > equal, we can address the blurring of societal gender > > > roles. > > > > > > -- Len/ Kalipadma > > > > > > > > > --- NMadasamy <nmadasamy@s...> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > , "Mary Ann" > > > > <buttercookie61> wrote: > > > > > I think it would also be beneficial for the roles > > > > to be > > > > > interchangeable between male and female, rather > > > > than one always > > > > > representing Bhairava, one always representing > > > > Kumari. This would be > > > > > in keeping with Ardhanarashwari/a, it would seem. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What makes women different from man [1] women > > > > menstruate [2] women > > > > have the womb. The most powerful symbol of shakti is > > > > the yoni. > > > > > > > > The yoni does not know any distinction between > > > > husband, brothers, > > > > sons ,relations and caste. The yoni is govern by > > > > one: The act of > > > > creation. Any seed you plant it grows into life. > > > > That is the power of > > > > the yoni, in its ability to cause social > > > > instability. In any form of > > > > Shakti Worship, the worship of DEVI in a human body > > > > is the most > > > > powerful. > > > > > > > > Perhaps we should go back to our basic and ask the > > > > question : What is > > > > Tantra? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 29, 2005 Report Share Posted September 29, 2005 , "Mary Ann" <buttercookie61> wrote: > For me, Sadhana is how I live my life, not just a > separate "spiritual" pursuit. I believe there is no different from where we are. Personally I believe Sadhana does not confine to the pooja room. Our relationship with the people around us : the family, the neighbours are all part of our sadhana. If you hurt your husband, you are hurting DEVI. You hurt your daughter, its DEVI you're hurting. Our whole environment and its people around us becomes DEVI. But eventually we still need to go back to personal level, because our association with DEVI is private. "I was quoting something I read of Amma's regarding what the Ardharashwari/a symbolizes. In her Awakening Universal Motherhood booklet, she says (and I paraphrase, though I may already have quoted this in an earlier post) that ancient Indian sages knew that human beings are both male and female and that is what the Ardhanarashara/i symbolizes, or represents, something like that." I believe I never disagree Amma's interpretation of the Ardhanarashara/i. She comes from a different tradition. Take example the Thousand Names of the Divine Mother text. For Amma devotees, the book is the best and the ultimate. But for many especially the Kualas there are more. We never dispute what the sages says too. I'm told [ I am tempted not to look at the books right now, but to try and remember what Im being told before. I hope somebody can correct me if im wrong], Ardhanareshara/i resides above the head cakra. If you can feel the pressure on your head, and the feeling of feet like pressing against the top of our head, its Ardhanareshara/i feet you are feeling. The feet of The Guru. In Tantra, eventually its the union of the DEVI, The Guru, The Sricakra and The Sadhika[ Do it get it right?] But Lets us go back to the main topic, where this whole thread started of. I mentioned about the Kumari Pooja, about the worshipping of the girl/ pre puberty. And this whole issue gets diverted to the physical aspect of the male and female. You asked: why female and not the male. I have detail the rationale for it. That is why we are called the Shaktas. We worship the Divine Feminine. Look at the introduction of our group page "Some conceive of her as the Shakti (Supreme Energy) of Shiva (Supreme Consciousness); others worship her as Brahman Itself, holding that all other forms of Divinity are but her diverse manifestations" But please remember that the kumari pooja is not the only pooja as prescribed in the Shakta Tradition. When the first time I encounter the Kumari Pooja, during Navarathri. As parent, we felt blessed when the main priest approached us to get the permission, for our daughter to be the kumari during the one of the navarathri. In Nageshwari temple here in KL, kumari pooja, sumangali and suvasini pooja perform practically every night [for 9 nights] during navarathri. That particular night [when my daughter became the kumari] when it was my turn to seek blessing, I stood there not sure what to do. I'm being told "you do not prostrate before anybody but your Guru and Devi". I just bowed my head slightly as my `daughter' blessed and places the kumkum etc over my head. Later my guru told me "you should prostrate before HER, because at that particular moment, that young girl is not your daughter, but a KUMARI, The Devi herself manifested." When I mention about this Kumari pooja to several Shakta friends in Singapore, they got excited. "Hey! I also want leh!". They wants to perform the pooja but don't know what is the significant and rationale for the pooja. The same with reciting the mantras. You not only have to recite it correctly, but to understand the meaning, the significant and the visualization that comes with it, only then the Mantra comes alive. There are many poojas. The Cakra/khadgamala pooja, the sumangali pooja etc. There are many, and Kumari Pooja is one of the many. Is it for everybody? No. It is not. For some, they may benefit from the Pooja while others may have no effect at all, perhaps they don't need it at all. If you think the Kumari Pooja is so stupid and it is not a true reflection of your understanding of the realize being, so it be. Just like any other ritual, as I see it, its one of the tools, we use to get ourselves near to DEVIHOOD. Like Sex too. How often people are being deluded to think and associate SEX and DEVI. When you mention Devi as Lover immediately they think about SEX and DEVI. One guy gave me an example "it's like beer advertisement. It's the association. Like Carlsberg beer. They associate a sexy girl with the beer. In the end you buy the beer and not the sexy girl. The add company is using a motivator to induce a person to drink beer. Like Shakti using sex to create a more profound love. I also think that love is also a motivator. At a very high stage even love disappears. Shakti will loose its association. So does love, it will be neither good nor evil, male not female, love nor hate. All association will be lost. But it is a powerful motivator. It will be there until the very high stage in spirituality. If you associate good thing with Devi (food, music, or anything nice with Devi with Devi it will create a positive association with Devi). Not necessary Sex. Sex is an illusion. But look what happens, the beer sales go up. It was a subliminal motivator. Maybe it can be applied to spirituality as well. A powerful motivator until you looses the association and concentrate only on spirituality. This theory is from the theory of classical conditioning" But as I'm told Sex is one of the tools, not the motivator. That is how all this Tantric Sex gets all blown out into proportion. When you talk about Tantric immediately people associated it with Sex. Why because SEX sells. You want to sell a car, to get attention from people esp. men; you put a sexy lady there. You want to sell beer, you put a scantly dress lady up there, you are sure to get the attention. It's more of an exploitation of Men's weakness. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 29, 2005 Report Share Posted September 29, 2005 Your daughter acted as the Kumari for a Kumari Puja? I've read that in Nepal, the girls who portray the Kumari are seen as unlucky for men, and frequently they cannot get married. I hope your daughter will not be so treated! -- Len/ Kalipadma --- NMadasamy <nmadasamy wrote: > When the first time I encounter the Kumari Pooja, > during Navarathri. > As parent, we felt blessed when the main priest > approached us to get > the permission, for our daughter to be the kumari > during the one of > the navarathri. In Nageshwari temple here in KL, > kumari pooja, > sumangali and suvasini pooja perform practically > every night [for 9 > nights] during navarathri. That particular night > [when my daughter > became the kumari] when it was my turn to seek > blessing, I stood > there not sure what to do. I'm being told "you do > not > prostrate > before anybody but your Guru and Devi". I just bowed > my head > slightly as my `daughter' blessed and places the > kumkum etc > over my > head. Later my guru told me "you should prostrate > before HER, > because at that particular moment, that young girl > is not your > daughter, but a KUMARI, The Devi herself > manifested." > > When I mention about this Kumari pooja to several > Shakta friends in > Singapore, they got excited. "Hey! I also want > leh!". They > wants to > perform the pooja but don't know what is the > significant and > rationale for the pooja. The same with reciting the > mantras. You not > only have to recite it correctly, but to understand > the meaning, the > significant and the visualization that comes with > it, only then the > Mantra comes alive. > Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 29, 2005 Report Share Posted September 29, 2005 I also heard that as well, amongst a few other things. JANARDANA DASA Len Rosenberg <kalipadma108 wrote: Your daughter acted as the Kumari for a Kumari Puja? I've read that in Nepal, the girls who portray the Kumari are seen as unlucky for men, and frequently they cannot get married. I hope your daughter will not be so treated! -- Len/ Kalipadma --- NMadasamy <nmadasamy wrote: > When the first time I encounter the Kumari Pooja, > during Navarathri. > As parent, we felt blessed when the main priest > approached us to get > the permission, for our daughter to be the kumari > during the one of > the navarathri. In Nageshwari temple here in KL, > kumari pooja, > sumangali and suvasini pooja perform practically > every night [for 9 > nights] during navarathri. That particular night > [when my daughter > became the kumari] when it was my turn to seek > blessing, I stood > there not sure what to do. I'm being told "you do > not > prostrate > before anybody but your Guru and Devi". I just bowed > my head > slightly as my `daughter' blessed and places the > kumkum etc > over my > head. Later my guru told me "you should prostrate > before HER, > because at that particular moment, that young girl > is not your > daughter, but a KUMARI, The Devi herself > manifested." > > When I mention about this Kumari pooja to several > Shakta friends in > Singapore, they got excited. "Hey! I also want > leh!". They > wants to > perform the pooja but don't know what is the > significant and > rationale for the pooja. The same with reciting the > mantras. You not > only have to recite it correctly, but to understand > the meaning, the > significant and the visualization that comes with > it, only then the > Mantra comes alive. > Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 Traditions Divine Visit your group "" on the web. for Good Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 29, 2005 Report Share Posted September 29, 2005 Nora: Interesting to bow to your daughter as Kumari. It reminds me of that painting I put a link on board to recently, Messenger in the Wind, and the 4th grade girl's interpretation of the painting: Humans need to treat their babies better. At first, I interpreted the painting only as a sign to be aware of certain energies and not disrespect them. That is, to recognize powerful energy (electrical) lines, not to disregard out of blind hope or wishing things were a certain way, thinking that you can magically make a difference without a true understanding of the energy lines. To act without understanding or awareness could cause pain, shock, injury, even death. So, I saw the angel above the power lines as saying: Don't hurt each other with your power, and avoid those who would. However, this week, it occurred to me to interpret it as crossing power lines. The angel in the painting has a message that she is carrying across power lines - meaning that the usual power structure, such as in parent-child relationships, teacher-student relations, employer-employee relations, etc. needs to be flexible enough to allow for the child's awareness to be respected and recognized as knowledge in its own right, which can also teach the parent. Just as students often teach the teacher - if the teacher is not trapped in their ego with incorrect notions about power. Same with employers/employees - if people don't buy into ego trips about position, they will recognize and utilize talent, ideas, etc. for the benefit of all in the company (and the world) rather than treat people badly and exploit, etc. I am saying that Devi can be worhsipped in male form, and Shiva in female form, and that doing this would be beneficial because it would help people let go of wrong ideas about form. As Len pointed out, wrong ideas about form create biases that make it illegal for two people who are not physically one man and one woman to marry. And not only can they not marry, there is so much bias against them in life, and imagine if your very love center was not free. You can imagine this because that center of love isn't free until power lines can be safely crossed, information recognized and respected, a la Messenger in the Wind. Why would Kumari be seen as not beneficial to men? Some mistaken notion about power, perhaps -- that the Kumari can symbolize moving out of false ideas about power and into true ones, and yes, this move would change traditional concepts of marriage, and traditional ways of understanding what or how something is "beneficial." , Janardana Dasa <lightdweller> wrote: > I also heard that as well, amongst a few other things. > > JANARDANA DASA > > Len Rosenberg <kalipadma108> wrote: > > Your daughter acted as the Kumari for a Kumari Puja? > I've read that in Nepal, the girls who portray the > Kumari are seen as unlucky for men, and frequently > they cannot get married. I hope your daughter will > not be so treated! > > -- Len/ Kalipadma > > > --- NMadasamy <nmadasamy@s...> > wrote: > > > When the first time I encounter the Kumari Pooja, > > during Navarathri. > > As parent, we felt blessed when the main priest > > approached us to get > > the permission, for our daughter to be the kumari > > during the one of > > the navarathri. In Nageshwari temple here in KL, > > kumari pooja, > > sumangali and suvasini pooja perform practically > > every night [for 9 > > nights] during navarathri. That particular night > > [when my daughter > > became the kumari] when it was my turn to seek > > blessing, I stood > > there not sure what to do. I'm being told "you do > > not > > prostrate > > before anybody but your Guru and Devi". I just bowed > > my head > > slightly as my `daughter' blessed and places the > > kumkum etc > > over my > > head. Later my guru told me "you should prostrate > > before HER, > > because at that particular moment, that young girl > > is not your > > daughter, but a KUMARI, The Devi herself > > manifested." > > > > When I mention about this Kumari pooja to several > > Shakta friends in > > Singapore, they got excited. "Hey! I also want > > leh!". They > > wants to > > perform the pooja but don't know what is the > > significant and > > rationale for the pooja. The same with reciting the > > mantras. You not > > only have to recite it correctly, but to understand > > the meaning, the > > significant and the visualization that comes with > > it, only then the > > Mantra comes alive. > > > > > > > Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 > > > > > Traditions Divine > > > > > > Visit your group "" on the web. > > > > > Terms of Service. > > > > > > > > > for Good > Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 30, 2005 Report Share Posted September 30, 2005 , "Mary Ann" <buttercookie61> wrote: Nora: Interesting to bow to your daughter as Kumari. I am saying that Devi can be worhsipped in male form, and Shiva in female form, and that doing this would be beneficial because it would help people let go of wrong ideas about form" Read again : I am told, at that particular moment in time, she is not your daughter but a Kumari. Can you do it Mary Ann? yeah! you said, worship shiva as female and worship devi as male. If im to put a bhairava [ a young boy] before you and say : Prostrate before him now? Can you do it? If you cant, please do not try to tell others about the need to worship Devi in either male or female. The point is there are many who just like to talk, theorized and become so philisophical, but they cannot act upon it. Like im told, theory and philisophy can only cloud your mind. You carry book in your hand and you have read all the theories and you think you know it all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 30, 2005 Report Share Posted September 30, 2005 , Len Rosenberg <kalipadma108> wrote: > > Your daughter acted as the Kumari for a Kumari Puja? > I've read that in Nepal, the girls who portray the > Kumari are seen as unlucky for men, and frequently > they cannot get married. I hope your daughter will > not be so treated! > > -- Len/ Kalipadma > But that is in Nepal. I think [ based on the historical information about this Kumari legend ], the Kumari as we are talking here is different than the Nepalese Kumari. This whole idea of unlucky and lucky to me its just a state of mind. I as a mother personally felt blessed when my daughter being approach. Because to us she is also Devi send. Dont we all consider our children as divine blessings. So how can it be unlucky, if the children represents the divine itself. Back to my daughter, after the whole ceremony, she is no different. She is still the child we love, the child that have bring a lot of joy and happiness. She even forgot about that short moment when she is the kumari. As if that never happen before. Interesting isnt it. Perhaps that is what they meant by this innocent and purity. The mind does not hang on to this idea " hey! I became the kumari that day, and as such I am special and so, I should be treated special". If any of you think, I have influence my daughter to take that role. My answer is No. My husband and me did not force our daughter. We explain to her what the whole thing is all about, and she happily agreed telling us "today I will be a Kumari. I am Amman". That is what I called : The innocence of a pure mind : The Kumari. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 30, 2005 Report Share Posted September 30, 2005 I am not trying to come out of left field, nor really trying to take a dig at you; this is just a thought: Respectfully, I think that you are making this a little more complicated than what it actually is. This is simply an age old tradition of worship that we are describing here. We have to be careful not to fall into the "Western orientalist" scholar mode of trying to transpose/impose Western views, thinking, symbolism and interpretation on the sacred as expressed through the eternal Vedas. This type of thought (Vedic/Puranic) is something that is totally foreign to, and beyond the ken of normal western thinking. It is interesting to note that it is only in the Hindu religion that people even really do this where it is widely accepted and tolerated. The Mohammedans don't speculate about the sacred like that as expressed in the Koran, nor do the Buddhist believers as of late (vis a vis their new found political power-Dali Lama et al; and the Christians and Jews surely don't hardly much entertain complicated speculation about what they hold as sacred) without some kind of uproar. But the Hindus always grin and bear it under the guise of tolerance and such. Since the "Orientalist" scholars Max Muller, Julius Jolly, et al., this kind of stuff (interpretative speculation) has been going on, and has somewhat convoluted and biased the western mind and such about the Hindu religion and rituals in general, by imposition of psuedo-sexual or freudian symbolism (i.e. Emory University's Dr John Courtright and his Ganesha sex symbolism; Jeffrey Kripal's sexually blasphemous work about Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa, "Kali's Child", as examples). http://desitalk.newsindia-times.com/2003/12/05/books-gan18.html http://www.sulekha.com/printer.asp?ctid=1000&cid=245715 There is an emerging trend away from this, as Hindus or "practitioners of SANATANA DHARMA" become more aware of how the "western scholarly" world has been painting them since the British Raj. Observe how in the universities all of the Bhuddist, Muslim, Jewish and Christian Scholars are just that: Bhuddist, Muslim, Jewish, and Christian. They therefore can somewhat steer their religion's image and present a PROPER UNDERSTANDING of it to those that are not that, lest there be an uproar. But, on the flipside to say that a person has no voice or understanding about a religion because they are not that, is ALSO presumptious and is not the answer either. Just a thought and observation. JANARDANA DASA Mary Ann <buttercookie61 wrote: Nora: Interesting to bow to your daughter as Kumari. It reminds me of that painting I put a link on board to recently, Messenger in the Wind, and the 4th grade girl's interpretation of the painting: Humans need to treat their babies better. At first, I interpreted the painting only as a sign to be aware of certain energies and not disrespect them. That is, to recognize powerful energy (electrical) lines, not to disregard out of blind hope or wishing things were a certain way, thinking that you can magically make a difference without a true understanding of the energy lines. To act without understanding or awareness could cause pain, shock, injury, even death. So, I saw the angel above the power lines as saying: Don't hurt each other with your power, and avoid those who would. However, this week, it occurred to me to interpret it as crossing power lines. The angel in the painting has a message that she is carrying across power lines - meaning that the usual power structure, such as in parent-child relationships, teacher-student relations, employer-employee relations, etc. needs to be flexible enough to allow for the child's awareness to be respected and recognized as knowledge in its own right, which can also teach the parent. Just as students often teach the teacher - if the teacher is not trapped in their ego with incorrect notions about power. Same with employers/employees - if people don't buy into ego trips about position, they will recognize and utilize talent, ideas, etc. for the benefit of all in the company (and the world) rather than treat people badly and exploit, etc. I am saying that Devi can be worhsipped in male form, and Shiva in female form, and that doing this would be beneficial because it would help people let go of wrong ideas about form. As Len pointed out, wrong ideas about form create biases that make it illegal for two people who are not physically one man and one woman to marry. And not only can they not marry, there is so much bias against them in life, and imagine if your very love center was not free. You can imagine this because that center of love isn't free until power lines can be safely crossed, information recognized and respected, a la Messenger in the Wind. Why would Kumari be seen as not beneficial to men? Some mistaken notion about power, perhaps -- that the Kumari can symbolize moving out of false ideas about power and into true ones, and yes, this move would change traditional concepts of marriage, and traditional ways of understanding what or how something is "beneficial." , Janardana Dasa <lightdweller> wrote: > I also heard that as well, amongst a few other things. > > JANARDANA DASA > > Len Rosenberg <kalipadma108> wrote: > > Your daughter acted as the Kumari for a Kumari Puja? > I've read that in Nepal, the girls who portray the > Kumari are seen as unlucky for men, and frequently > they cannot get married. I hope your daughter will > not be so treated! > > -- Len/ Kalipadma > > > --- NMadasamy <nmadasamy@s...> > wrote: > > > When the first time I encounter the Kumari Pooja, > > during Navarathri. > > As parent, we felt blessed when the main priest > > approached us to get > > the permission, for our daughter to be the kumari > > during the one of > > the navarathri. In Nageshwari temple here in KL, > > kumari pooja, > > sumangali and suvasini pooja perform practically > > every night [for 9 > > nights] during navarathri. That particular night > > [when my daughter > > became the kumari] when it was my turn to seek > > blessing, I stood > > there not sure what to do. I'm being told "you do > > not > > prostrate > > before anybody but your Guru and Devi". I just bowed > > my head > > slightly as my `daughter' blessed and places the > > kumkum etc > > over my > > head. Later my guru told me "you should prostrate > > before HER, > > because at that particular moment, that young girl > > is not your > > daughter, but a KUMARI, The Devi herself > > manifested." > > > > When I mention about this Kumari pooja to several > > Shakta friends in > > Singapore, they got excited. "Hey! I also want > > leh!". They > > wants to > > perform the pooja but don't know what is the > > significant and > > rationale for the pooja. The same with reciting the > > mantras. You not > > only have to recite it correctly, but to understand > > the meaning, the > > significant and the visualization that comes with > > it, only then the > > Mantra comes alive. > > > > > > > Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 > > > > > Traditions Divine > > > > > > Visit your group "" on the web. > > > > > Terms of Service. > > > > > > > > > for Good > Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort. > > Traditions Divine Visit your group "" on the web. for Good Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 30, 2005 Report Share Posted September 30, 2005 Hi, Well, I was attempting to experience something transformative from contemplating the Kumari ritual and from Nora having shared her experience - and I succeeded, for me. But I can see that my post certainly did not speak to or for all others here at Shakti Sadhana. But that's why there's more than one member of the group, and more than one voice in the world - so we can all speak and post! I am not familiar with any of the authors or scholars you refer to, so I don't think I'm falling into the particular trap you describe, though I do know what you mean. But there ARE western scholars that question western religions. People like Matthew Fox, for example. Here's a little blurb: "Matthew Fox is author of 26 books including "Original Blessing,The Reinvention of Work,Creativity: Where the Divine and the Human Meet,One River, Many Wells: Wisdom Springing from Global Faiths,A Spirituality Named Compassion" and his most recent "A New Reformation!." He was a member of the Dominican Order for 34 years. He holds a doctorate (received summa cum laude) in the History and Theology of Spirituality from the Institut Catholique de Paris. Seeking to establish a pedagogy that was friendly to learning spirituality, he established an Institute in Culture and Creation Spirituality that operated for seven years at Mundelein College in Chicago and twelve years at Holy Names College in Oakland. For ten of those years at Holy Names College Cardinal Ratzinger, as chief Inquisitor and head of the Congregation of Doctrine and Faith (called the Office of the Holy Inquisition until 1965), tried to shut the program down. Ratzinger silenced Fox for one year in 1988 and forced him to step down as director. Three years later he expelled Fox from the Order and then had the program terminated at Holy Names College." I'm not a "follower" of Matthew Fox's, but I have been impressed by what I have learned of his work. I don't have your perspective, being a different person from a different place; I have my perspective. But I don't agree that there is such a huge gap between East and West. Why Amma and Deepak Chopra speak to me is that they each recognize and celebrate what we have in common from East to West, rather than focusing on that which keeps us apart. BTW I believe Amma's spiritual practice is called SANATANA DHARMA, though Amma is non-denominational and welcomes all. My on-board explorations and articulations are just me tuning my koshas, getting them to work together better. , Janardana Dasa <lightdweller> wrote: > I am not trying to come out of left field, nor really trying to take a dig at you; this is just a thought: > > Respectfully, I think that you are making this a little more complicated than what it actually is. This is simply an age old tradition of worship that we are describing here. We have to be careful not to fall into the "Western orientalist" scholar mode of trying to transpose/impose Western views, thinking, symbolism and interpretation on the sacred as expressed through the eternal Vedas. This type of thought (Vedic/Puranic) is something that is totally foreign to, and beyond the ken of normal western thinking. > > It is interesting to note that it is only in the Hindu religion that people even really do this where it is widely accepted and tolerated. The Mohammedans don't speculate about the sacred like that as expressed in the Koran, nor do the Buddhist believers as of late (vis a vis their new found political power-Dali Lama et al; and the Christians and Jews surely don't hardly much entertain complicated speculation about what they hold as sacred) without some kind of uproar. But the Hindus always grin and bear it under the guise of tolerance and such. > > Since the "Orientalist" scholars Max Muller, Julius Jolly, et al., this kind of stuff (interpretative speculation) has been going on, and has somewhat convoluted and biased the western mind and such about the Hindu religion and rituals in general, by imposition of psuedo-sexual or freudian symbolism (i.e. Emory University's Dr John Courtright and his Ganesha sex symbolism; Jeffrey Kripal's sexually blasphemous work about Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa, "Kali's Child", as examples). > > http://desitalk.newsindia-times.com/2003/12/05/books-gan18.html > > http://www.sulekha.com/printer.asp?ctid=1000&cid=245715 > > There is an emerging trend away from this, as Hindus or "practitioners of SANATANA DHARMA" become more aware of how the "western scholarly" world has been painting them since the British Raj. Observe how in the universities all of the Bhuddist, Muslim, Jewish and Christian Scholars are just that: Bhuddist, Muslim, Jewish, and Christian. They therefore can somewhat steer their religion's image and present a PROPER UNDERSTANDING of it to those that are not that, lest there be an uproar. But, on the flipside to say that a person has no voice or understanding about a religion because they are not that, is ALSO presumptious and is not the answer either. Just a thought and observation. > > JANARDANA DASA > > Mary Ann <buttercookie61> wrote: > Nora: Interesting to bow to your daughter as Kumari. It reminds me > of that painting I put a link on board to recently, Messenger in the > Wind, and the 4th grade girl's interpretation of the painting: > Humans need to treat their babies better. > > At first, I interpreted the painting only as a sign to be aware of > certain energies and not disrespect them. That is, to recognize > powerful energy (electrical) lines, not to disregard out of blind > hope or wishing things were a certain way, thinking that you can > magically make a difference without a true understanding of the > energy lines. To act without understanding or awareness could cause > pain, shock, injury, even death. So, I saw the angel above the power > lines as saying: Don't hurt each other with your power, and avoid > those who would. > > However, this week, it occurred to me to interpret it as crossing > power lines. The angel in the painting has a message that she is > carrying across power lines - meaning that the usual power > structure, such as in parent-child relationships, teacher-student > relations, employer-employee relations, etc. needs to be flexible > enough to allow for the child's awareness to be respected and > recognized as knowledge in its own right, which can also teach the > parent. Just as students often teach the teacher - if the teacher is > not trapped in their ego with incorrect notions about power. Same > with employers/employees - if people don't buy into ego trips about > position, they will recognize and utilize talent, ideas, etc. for > the benefit of all in the company (and the world) rather than treat > people badly and exploit, etc. > > I am saying that Devi can be worhsipped in male form, and Shiva in > female form, and that doing this would be beneficial because it > would help people let go of wrong ideas about form. As Len pointed > out, wrong ideas about form create biases that make it illegal for > two people who are not physically one man and one woman to marry. > And not only can they not marry, there is so much bias against them > in life, and imagine if your very love center was not free. You can > imagine this because that center of love isn't free until power > lines can be safely crossed, information recognized and respected, a > la Messenger in the Wind. > > Why would Kumari be seen as not beneficial to men? Some mistaken > notion about power, perhaps -- that the Kumari can symbolize moving > out of false ideas about power and into true ones, and yes, this > move would change traditional concepts of marriage, and traditional > ways of understanding what or how something is "beneficial." > > , Janardana Dasa > <lightdweller> wrote: > > I also heard that as well, amongst a few other things. > > > > JANARDANA DASA > > > > Len Rosenberg <kalipadma108> wrote: > > > > Your daughter acted as the Kumari for a Kumari Puja? > > I've read that in Nepal, the girls who portray the > > Kumari are seen as unlucky for men, and frequently > > they cannot get married. I hope your daughter will > > not be so treated! > > > > -- Len/ Kalipadma > > > > > > --- NMadasamy <nmadasamy@s...> > > wrote: > > > > > When the first time I encounter the Kumari Pooja, > > > during Navarathri. > > > As parent, we felt blessed when the main priest > > > approached us to get > > > the permission, for our daughter to be the kumari > > > during the one of > > > the navarathri. In Nageshwari temple here in KL, > > > kumari pooja, > > > sumangali and suvasini pooja perform practically > > > every night [for 9 > > > nights] during navarathri. That particular night > > > [when my daughter > > > became the kumari] when it was my turn to seek > > > blessing, I stood > > > there not sure what to do. I'm being told "you do > > > not > > > prostrate > > > before anybody but your Guru and Devi". I just bowed > > > my head > > > slightly as my `daughter' blessed and places the > > > kumkum etc > > > over my > > > head. Later my guru told me "you should prostrate > > > before HER, > > > because at that particular moment, that young girl > > > is not your > > > daughter, but a KUMARI, The Devi herself > > > manifested." > > > > > > When I mention about this Kumari pooja to several > > > Shakta friends in > > > Singapore, they got excited. "Hey! I also want > > > leh!". They > > > wants to > > > perform the pooja but don't know what is the > > > significant and > > > rationale for the pooja. The same with reciting the > > > mantras. You not > > > only have to recite it correctly, but to understand > > > the meaning, the > > > significant and the visualization that comes with > > > it, only then the > > > Mantra comes alive. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 > > > > > > > > > > Traditions Divine > > > > > > > > > > > > Visit your group "" on the web. > > > > > > > > > > Terms of > Service. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for Good > > Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort. > > > > > > > > > > > Traditions Divine > > > > > > Visit your group "" on the web. > > > > > Terms of Service. > > > > > > > > > for Good > Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 30, 2005 Report Share Posted September 30, 2005 I am sorrow but within in these narrow boundaries, as i have already anticipated in my first post. For either reference i quote myself LOL: Qoute from Mahahradanath: The anatomical or biological approach to spirituality has a problem it is offending to some devotees to associate their own biology with the deities. Because of that even now one can hardly speak openly about some ideas without hurting others (or being hurt by enraged others) many secrets have been lost already because of this lack of communication. Now it is time for my to back out and go back to my cave before this becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. That means: it will not be posibble for me to further discuss my ideas within these narrowe boundaries of this groups definition of Shakti Sadhana since the ensuing discussion had already hurt the feelings of our esteemend moderator. , "Devi Bhakta" <devi_bhakta> wrote: I respect the participants in this debate, > and have no desire to play the heavy and start moderating > discussions that touch only tangentially on the topic of this group. > > Unexciting and unimaginative as it may seem, this is > simply a spiritual forum. ! > > Now, if someone finds these deities to be useful symbols and > archetypes in other fields of interest and inquiry, that is fine -- > but it is not Shakti Sadhana; it is not what this group is about. purpose! > > Again, the raison d'etre of this group is to discuss sadhana, as > pedestrian and bourgeoise as that may seem to some. I would ask that > our discussions address that goal. > Then again, I might be full of sacred cow manure. You never know. > Take it or leave it, as you wish ... ;-) > > DB > > > , "Mary Ann" > <buttercookie61> wrote: > > Len, your first paragraph below sounds like an argument for S&M. > > Everyone of us is the Ardhanarashwari/a, from my understanding of > > the deity's symbolism. I feel that until the female is accepted > > within the male, and the male accepted within the female, the > outer > > respect you say you want for women in the world cannot happen. > When > > the gender roles stay static in rituals and in society, it does > not > > further the recognition and acceptance of the fullness of human > > qualities in each human being, but continues projections outward > > onto the genders that hinder growth, that cause rigidity, or > > armoring, to use a Reichian term. > > > > , Len Rosenberg > > <kalipadma108> wrote: > > > > > > Nora, Mary Ann is obsessed with the idea of androgyny. > > > And I must agree that the Soul has no gender, and > > > that we are souls incarnating for innumerable times > > > into various bodies both male and female. It is > > > mind-expanding to play with the exchange of > > > gender-roles, which are superimposed by our individual > > > societies. > > > > > > But while we are incarnated, we have been dealt a body > > > which (usually) has one gender or another. Very few > > > of us are actually Ardhanarishvaras. And most > > > societies get very edgy when people try to blurr the > > > distinctions between genders. (Witness the stupid > > > Defense of Marriage legislation going on in the USA!) > > > > > > I await the brouhaha that will ensue when science > > > discovers a means for cloned fetuses to be nurtured > > > inside a man's body. Until that time, it may be > > > argued that the only activity that the genders can't > > > share is childbirth. > > > > > > The good people of Nepal are unlikely to agree with > > > Mary Ann: Why, yes, let's have young boys portray > > > Kumari sometimes, and have young girls portray > > > Bhairava! > > > > > > I'd be much more concerned that ALL women (in Nepal, > > > or elsewhere) be treated with respect and allowed to > > > earn an honest living, without being abused by > > > fathers, husbands, sons or brothers. When rights are > > > equal, we can address the blurring of societal gender > > > roles. > > > > > > -- Len/ Kalipadma > > > > > > > > > --- NMadasamy <nmadasamy@s...> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > , "Mary Ann" > > > > <buttercookie61> wrote: > > > > > I think it would also be beneficial for the roles > > > > to be > > > > > interchangeable between male and female, rather > > > > than one always > > > > > representing Bhairava, one always representing > > > > Kumari. This would be > > > > > in keeping with Ardhanarashwari/a, it would seem. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What makes women different from man [1] women > > > > menstruate [2] women > > > > have the womb. The most powerful symbol of shakti is > > > > the yoni. > > > > > > > > The yoni does not know any distinction between > > > > husband, brothers, > > > > sons ,relations and caste. The yoni is govern by > > > > one: The act of > > > > creation. Any seed you plant it grows into life. > > > > That is the power of > > > > the yoni, in its ability to cause social > > > > instability. In any form of > > > > Shakti Worship, the worship of DEVI in a human body > > > > is the most > > > > powerful. > > > > > > > > Perhaps we should go back to our basic and ask the > > > > question : What is > > > > Tantra? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 30, 2005 Report Share Posted September 30, 2005 I understand, as you are correct in that AMMACHI practices true SANTANA DHARMA. Technically speaking there is no such thing as HINDUISM per se. The term Hinduism always denotes in the mind of Westerners and most Indians a religious phenomena only associated with India; this idea is not true. Hence, Sanatana Dharma, its proper name, is indeed preferable, as it denotes a WORLDWIDE PHENOMENA. Many Indians don't realize that by not using Sanatana Dharma, and by using the term Hinduism, they are limiting their religion to such a local scale, (i.e. india and the diaspora, Fiji, et al.) and are indeed limiting the greatness of their religion. It is about time that Hinduism stops being the door mat of the worlds religions and take on the much tougher attitude of the other world religions. I really feel its starting to happen now. Christians don't limit Christianity to the Holy Land, Mohammadens don't limit Islam to Saudi Arabia! Actually, Muslims will always dive at the chance to export Islamic culture and Arabic to any place that is receptive! Interesting to note that In many parts of Nigeria they are following Arabic culture to the T! Why shouldn't "HINDUS" think the same way? I also know about Matthew Fox and his Liberation Theology. Sorry to stray from the subject, just some musings. Jai Sree Krishna, JANARDANA DASA Mary Ann <buttercookie61 wrote: Hi, Well, I was attempting to experience something transformative from contemplating the Kumari ritual and from Nora having shared her experience - and I succeeded, for me. But I can see that my post certainly did not speak to or for all others here at Shakti Sadhana. But that's why there's more than one member of the group, and more than one voice in the world - so we can all speak and post! I am not familiar with any of the authors or scholars you refer to, so I don't think I'm falling into the particular trap you describe, though I do know what you mean. But there ARE western scholars that question western religions. People like Matthew Fox, for example. Here's a little blurb: "Matthew Fox is author of 26 books including "Original Blessing,The Reinvention of Work,Creativity: Where the Divine and the Human Meet,One River, Many Wells: Wisdom Springing from Global Faiths,A Spirituality Named Compassion" and his most recent "A New Reformation!." He was a member of the Dominican Order for 34 years. He holds a doctorate (received summa cum laude) in the History and Theology of Spirituality from the Institut Catholique de Paris. Seeking to establish a pedagogy that was friendly to learning spirituality, he established an Institute in Culture and Creation Spirituality that operated for seven years at Mundelein College in Chicago and twelve years at Holy Names College in Oakland. For ten of those years at Holy Names College Cardinal Ratzinger, as chief Inquisitor and head of the Congregation of Doctrine and Faith (called the Office of the Holy Inquisition until 1965), tried to shut the program down. Ratzinger silenced Fox for one year in 1988 and forced him to step down as director. Three years later he expelled Fox from the Order and then had the program terminated at Holy Names College." I'm not a "follower" of Matthew Fox's, but I have been impressed by what I have learned of his work. I don't have your perspective, being a different person from a different place; I have my perspective. But I don't agree that there is such a huge gap between East and West. Why Amma and Deepak Chopra speak to me is that they each recognize and celebrate what we have in common from East to West, rather than focusing on that which keeps us apart. BTW I believe Amma's spiritual practice is called SANATANA DHARMA, though Amma is non-denominational and welcomes all. My on-board explorations and articulations are just me tuning my koshas, getting them to work together better. , Janardana Dasa <lightdweller> wrote: > I am not trying to come out of left field, nor really trying to take a dig at you; this is just a thought: > > Respectfully, I think that you are making this a little more complicated than what it actually is. This is simply an age old tradition of worship that we are describing here. We have to be careful not to fall into the "Western orientalist" scholar mode of trying to transpose/impose Western views, thinking, symbolism and interpretation on the sacred as expressed through the eternal Vedas. This type of thought (Vedic/Puranic) is something that is totally foreign to, and beyond the ken of normal western thinking. > > It is interesting to note that it is only in the Hindu religion that people even really do this where it is widely accepted and tolerated. The Mohammedans don't speculate about the sacred like that as expressed in the Koran, nor do the Buddhist believers as of late (vis a vis their new found political power-Dali Lama et al; and the Christians and Jews surely don't hardly much entertain complicated speculation about what they hold as sacred) without some kind of uproar. But the Hindus always grin and bear it under the guise of tolerance and such. > > Since the "Orientalist" scholars Max Muller, Julius Jolly, et al., this kind of stuff (interpretative speculation) has been going on, and has somewhat convoluted and biased the western mind and such about the Hindu religion and rituals in general, by imposition of psuedo-sexual or freudian symbolism (i.e. Emory University's Dr John Courtright and his Ganesha sex symbolism; Jeffrey Kripal's sexually blasphemous work about Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa, "Kali's Child", as examples). > > http://desitalk.newsindia-times.com/2003/12/05/books-gan18.html > > http://www.sulekha.com/printer.asp?ctid=1000&cid=245715 > > There is an emerging trend away from this, as Hindus or "practitioners of SANATANA DHARMA" become more aware of how the "western scholarly" world has been painting them since the British Raj. Observe how in the universities all of the Bhuddist, Muslim, Jewish and Christian Scholars are just that: Bhuddist, Muslim, Jewish, and Christian. They therefore can somewhat steer their religion's image and present a PROPER UNDERSTANDING of it to those that are not that, lest there be an uproar. But, on the flipside to say that a person has no voice or understanding about a religion because they are not that, is ALSO presumptious and is not the answer either. Just a thought and observation. > > JANARDANA DASA > > Mary Ann <buttercookie61> wrote: > Nora: Interesting to bow to your daughter as Kumari. It reminds me > of that painting I put a link on board to recently, Messenger in the > Wind, and the 4th grade girl's interpretation of the painting: > Humans need to treat their babies better. > > At first, I interpreted the painting only as a sign to be aware of > certain energies and not disrespect them. That is, to recognize > powerful energy (electrical) lines, not to disregard out of blind > hope or wishing things were a certain way, thinking that you can > magically make a difference without a true understanding of the > energy lines. To act without understanding or awareness could cause > pain, shock, injury, even death. So, I saw the angel above the power > lines as saying: Don't hurt each other with your power, and avoid > those who would. > > However, this week, it occurred to me to interpret it as crossing > power lines. The angel in the painting has a message that she is > carrying across power lines - meaning that the usual power > structure, such as in parent-child relationships, teacher-student > relations, employer-employee relations, etc. needs to be flexible > enough to allow for the child's awareness to be respected and > recognized as knowledge in its own right, which can also teach the > parent. Just as students often teach the teacher - if the teacher is > not trapped in their ego with incorrect notions about power. Same > with employers/employees - if people don't buy into ego trips about > position, they will recognize and utilize talent, ideas, etc. for > the benefit of all in the company (and the world) rather than treat > people badly and exploit, etc. > > I am saying that Devi can be worhsipped in male form, and Shiva in > female form, and that doing this would be beneficial because it > would help people let go of wrong ideas about form. As Len pointed > out, wrong ideas about form create biases that make it illegal for > two people who are not physically one man and one woman to marry. > And not only can they not marry, there is so much bias against them > in life, and imagine if your very love center was not free. You can > imagine this because that center of love isn't free until power > lines can be safely crossed, information recognized and respected, a > la Messenger in the Wind. > > Why would Kumari be seen as not beneficial to men? Some mistaken > notion about power, perhaps -- that the Kumari can symbolize moving > out of false ideas about power and into true ones, and yes, this > move would change traditional concepts of marriage, and traditional > ways of understanding what or how something is "beneficial." > > , Janardana Dasa > <lightdweller> wrote: > > I also heard that as well, amongst a few other things. > > > > JANARDANA DASA > > > > Len Rosenberg <kalipadma108> wrote: > > > > Your daughter acted as the Kumari for a Kumari Puja? > > I've read that in Nepal, the girls who portray the > > Kumari are seen as unlucky for men, and frequently > > they cannot get married. I hope your daughter will > > not be so treated! > > > > -- Len/ Kalipadma > > > > > > --- NMadasamy <nmadasamy@s...> > > wrote: > > > > > When the first time I encounter the Kumari Pooja, > > > during Navarathri. > > > As parent, we felt blessed when the main priest > > > approached us to get > > > the permission, for our daughter to be the kumari > > > during the one of > > > the navarathri. In Nageshwari temple here in KL, > > > kumari pooja, > > > sumangali and suvasini pooja perform practically > > > every night [for 9 > > > nights] during navarathri. That particular night > > > [when my daughter > > > became the kumari] when it was my turn to seek > > > blessing, I stood > > > there not sure what to do. I'm being told "you do > > > not > > > prostrate > > > before anybody but your Guru and Devi". I just bowed > > > my head > > > slightly as my `daughter' blessed and places the > > > kumkum etc > > > over my > > > head. Later my guru told me "you should prostrate > > > before HER, > > > because at that particular moment, that young girl > > > is not your > > > daughter, but a KUMARI, The Devi herself > > > manifested." > > > > > > When I mention about this Kumari pooja to several > > > Shakta friends in > > > Singapore, they got excited. "Hey! I also want > > > leh!". They > > > wants to > > > perform the pooja but don't know what is the > > > significant and > > > rationale for the pooja. The same with reciting the > > > mantras. You not > > > only have to recite it correctly, but to understand > > > the meaning, the > > > significant and the visualization that comes with > > > it, only then the > > > Mantra comes alive. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 > > > > > > > > > > Traditions Divine > > > > > > > > > > > > Visit your group "" on the web. > > > > > > > > > > Terms of > Service. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for Good > > Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort. > > > > > > > > > > > Traditions Divine > > > > > > Visit your group "" on the web. > > > > > Terms of Service. > > > > > > > > > for Good > Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort. > > Visit your group "" on the web. for Good Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 30, 2005 Report Share Posted September 30, 2005 Thats only in the Nepali tradition. Len Rosenberg <kalipadma108 wrote: Your daughter acted as the Kumari for a Kumari Puja? I've read that in Nepal, the girls who portray the Kumari are seen as unlucky for men, and frequently they cannot get married. I hope your daughter will not be so treated! -- Len/ Kalipadma --- NMadasamy <nmadasamy wrote: > When the first time I encounter the Kumari Pooja, > during Navarathri. > As parent, we felt blessed when the main priest > approached us to get > the permission, for our daughter to be the kumari > during the one of > the navarathri. In Nageshwari temple here in KL, > kumari pooja, > sumangali and suvasini pooja perform practically > every night [for 9 > nights] during navarathri. That particular night > [when my daughter > became the kumari] when it was my turn to seek > blessing, I stood > there not sure what to do. I'm being told "you do > not > prostrate > before anybody but your Guru and Devi". I just bowed > my head > slightly as my `daughter' blessed and places the > kumkum etc > over my > head. Later my guru told me "you should prostrate > before HER, > because at that particular moment, that young girl > is not your > daughter, but a KUMARI, The Devi herself > manifested." > > When I mention about this Kumari pooja to several > Shakta friends in > Singapore, they got excited. "Hey! I also want > leh!". They > wants to > perform the pooja but don't know what is the > significant and > rationale for the pooja. The same with reciting the > mantras. You not > only have to recite it correctly, but to understand > the meaning, the > significant and the visualization that comes with > it, only then the > Mantra comes alive. > Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 Traditions Divine Visit your group "" on the web. for Good Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort. 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.