Guest guest Report post Posted October 25, 2009 >The most prominent of them are Kamakhya temple at Assam , Credit for >this peetha goes to Lord Matsendra Nath. The other one is Famous >Kalighat Temple of Kolkata, The credit for this Saktipeetha goes to >Lord Goroksha Nath ( Disciple of Lord Matsendra Nath) of Nath >religion. So some claim, but I would say these traditions are much later than the sanctuaries themselves, whose origins are lost in the sands of time. No one person can be credited, their sacredness was recognized by entire communities before Naths were ever heard of. Look at Jvalamukhi: fire spouting out of the mountain. The sanctity of such a place is evident, and could go back to the paleolithic. Kaamaakhyaa sanctuary and many others as well. Max -- Max Dashu Art in Goddess Reverence http://www.maxdashu.net Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted October 25, 2009 In fact, carbon testing was done at the site, as well as archaeological work, and worship has been confirmed as going back at least 2500 years. The tribes that inhabited the area were Goddess worshippers, and Sanskritization was already well underway in the area by that point, though Assam rather famously did not adopt all of the Brahminical purity laws as other areas did. Matsyendranath was 9th-10th century CE. So the site was being used as a Devi worship site for at least a thousand years prior. Adherents of various Shaiva sects frequently assert their superiority and primacy over Shakta sects, saying that they invented Goddess worship in India, but it's not entirely accurate. -kulasundari On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 1:05 PM, Max Dashu <maxdashu wrote: > > > >The most prominent of them are Kamakhya temple at Assam , Credit for > >this peetha goes to Lord Matsendra Nath. The other one is Famous > >Kalighat Temple of Kolkata, The credit for this Saktipeetha goes to > >Lord Goroksha Nath ( Disciple of Lord Matsendra Nath) of Nath > >religion. > > So some claim, but I would say these traditions are much later than > the sanctuaries themselves, whose origins are lost in the sands of > time. No one person can be credited, their sacredness was recognized > by entire communities before Naths were ever heard of. Look at > Jvalamukhi: fire spouting out of the mountain. The sanctity of such a > place is evident, and could go back to the paleolithic. Kaamaakhyaa > sanctuary and many others as well. > > Max > -- > Max Dashu > > Art in Goddess Reverence > http://www.maxdashu.net > > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted October 26, 2009 jai gurudev jai maa all shaktipeeth r worshipped from time immemorial, and they were originally the powerhouse of matriacal religion which were taler taken over by patracal ideology. majority of the shaktipeeth r located in tribal areas and mountains etc,and were worshipped by tribals we can call them prehistoric humans,and then other humans settelers also joined in later. there r supposed to be 52 shaktipeeth on earth,and total 108 shaktipeeth,various others being in various other lokas [ other planes of existance ] like amravati-indrapuri etc. shakti worship = nature worship is oldest worship and worship to male gods is also indicetly or directly worship to mother,bcoz male and female is all part of mother adi shakti. om shakti gopal On 10/26/09, Max Dashu <maxdashu wrote: > > > > >The most prominent of them are Kamakhya temple at Assam , Credit for > >this peetha goes to Lord Matsendra Nath. The other one is Famous > >Kalighat Temple of Kolkata, The credit for this Saktipeetha goes to > >Lord Goroksha Nath ( Disciple of Lord Matsendra Nath) of Nath > >religion. > > So some claim, but I would say these traditions are much later than > the sanctuaries themselves, whose origins are lost in the sands of > time. No one person can be credited, their sacredness was recognized > by entire communities before Naths were ever heard of. Look at > Jvalamukhi: fire spouting out of the mountain. The sanctity of such a > place is evident, and could go back to the paleolithic. Kaamaakhyaa > sanctuary and many others as well. > > Max > -- > Max Dashu > > Art in Goddess Reverence > http://www.maxdashu.net > > -- ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++\ +++++++ TRUTH PATH DESTINATION GOAL REAL ADIGURU SALVATION KARMA DESTINY AND ALL THAT EXISTS IS ONLY SUPREME NATURE SUPREME ENERGY DIVINE MOTHER ADI SHAKTI MAHAKAALI MAHALAXMI MAHASARASWATI LALITA TRIPURA SUNDARI KULKUNDALINI PARMESHWARI SHE IS THE ONLY BEING IN EXISTANCE AND WE ARE ALL PART OF HER Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted October 26, 2009 All the Sakti Peethas including Jwali mai, Vaishna devi, Nanna devi of Hinglaj are all associated with Naths. Of course Matsendra gave a new life to it. Nath believes Shiva becomes shava(a dead body) without Satki. and the philosophy is the unification od Shiva with Sakti(Ardha nari swara). That is why God is " Dwaitaadwaita bibarjita " to Naths. Nath never denies Sakti. In fact Pasupata,Kalamukha, Kapalika, Aghori, sakti all derived from Nathism. Brahminism/Vedic religion is only a refined/modified religion. You are right to say that all were originally tribal and religions were tribal religions, and gradually integration started with a lot of refinement,what we termed as Vedic/Brahminic religion. However, in Vedic religion there is no place of Female Gods. The recognized Vedic Gods are Indra, Mitra, Varuna , Nisatiya etc. --- On Sun, 25/10/09, Kulasundari Devi <sundari wrote: Kulasundari Devi <sundari Re: Shakti peethas Sunday, 25 October, 2009, 8:14 PM In fact, carbon testing was done at the site, as well as archaeological work, and worship has been confirmed as going back at least 2500 years. The tribes that inhabited the area were Goddess worshippers, and Sanskritization was already well underway in the area by that point, though Assam rather famously did not adopt all of the Brahminical purity laws as other areas did. Matsyendranath was 9th-10th century CE. So the site was being used as a Devi worship site for at least a thousand years prior. Adherents of various Shaiva sects frequently assert their superiority and primacy over Shakta sects, saying that they invented Goddess worship in India, but it's not entirely accurate. -kulasundari On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 1:05 PM, Max Dashu <maxdashu (AT) lmi (DOT) net> wrote: > > > >The most prominent of them are Kamakhya temple at Assam , Credit for > >this peetha goes to Lord Matsendra Nath. The other one is Famous > >Kalighat Temple of Kolkata, The credit for this Saktipeetha goes to > >Lord Goroksha Nath ( Disciple of Lord Matsendra Nath) of Nath > >religion. > > So some claim, but I would say these traditions are much later than > the sanctuaries themselves, whose origins are lost in the sands of > time. No one person can be credited, their sacredness was recognized > by entire communities before Naths were ever heard of. Look at > Jvalamukhi: fire spouting out of the mountain. The sanctity of such a > place is evident, and could go back to the paleolithic. Kaamaakhyaa > sanctuary and many others as well. > > Max > -- > Max Dashu > > Art in Goddess Reverence > http://www.maxdashu .net > > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted October 26, 2009 >The most prominent of them are Kamakhya temple at Assam , Credit for >this peetha goes to Lord Matsendra Nath. The other one is Famous >Kalighat Temple of Kolkata, The credit for this Saktipeetha goes to >Lord Goroksha Nath ( Disciple of Lord Matsendra Nath) of Nath >religion. Max Dashu <maxdashu So some claim, ******* It is proved by researchers and historians. but I would say these traditions are much later than the sanctuaries themselves, whose origins are lost in the sands of time. ********** It may be your belief. so no comment. No one person can be credited, their sacredness was recognized by entire communities before Naths were ever heard of. Look at Jvalamukhi: fire spouting out of the mountain. The sanctity of such a place is evident, and could go back to the paleolithic. Kaamaakhyaa sanctuary and many others as well. >>>>>The origin of Naths goes back to Adi nath/ Brishav Nath/Rishav nath/ Rishav Dev and his Iseal have been discovered at Mohenjo Daro .In Rig Veda too, His name is mentioned.Hence it is much more ancient than the Vedic civilisation. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted October 26, 2009 jai gurudev, dear friend pls read rigved,srisuktam,durga suktam,ratrisukta,etc is there. pls read atharvaved : sridevi atharvasheesh dedicated to maa adi shakti lalita tripurasundari is there.she is called devmata,jaganmata etc... the panchadashi mantra is very clearly given in it and so also navaran mantra is given in it along with hidden meaning. so ved is not 100% male oriented. also, all so called male gods r nothing but aspects of the divine mother adi shakti lalita triprusundari. in entire ved only maa adi shakti lalita tripurasundari,is worshipped as she is mother nature,and indra,varun,mitra,surya,chandra,soma, etc all male gods r just aspects of her. she is the shunya and she is the akhil jagat,ie void and all of creation is her. even brahma-vishnu-rudra r part of her,they r creative-protective-destrutcive energy. ved is 100% adwaith.by carefully reading sridevi atharvasheesh we can know it all.it is only 25 verses,but the essence of dharma,and also all ved is given in it. fact is we r evolved by nature adi shakti param prakruti lalita tripurasundari, from 1 celled organisms,and this is proven to be true. if some groups make false claim abt their superiority we can always use scientific truth to assert the fact that all gods r part of aspects of nature,which we can actually prove,with scientific evidence. so,let us fight for truth and help expose truth=nature=maa adi shakti lalita tripurasundari kulkundalini to all so all can know her. let us start out ourself teaching our family simple things like sridurga saptashloki,sri durgha saptashati,siddhkunjika stotram,sridevi atharvasheesh etc..... then we can surely spread it to world.after all brahma-vishnu-rudra is maa adi shakti lalita tripurasundari. in our family we r upsask of lord shivgorakshnathji also,and so we know, that he himself is also a siddha and upasak of mother adi shakti lalita tripurasundari. all nath yogi r every alive having destroyed kaaldanda. om shakti gopal On 10/26/09, Abhijit Dasgupta <abhijitdasgupta92 wrote: > > All the Sakti Peethas including Jwali mai, Vaishna devi, Nanna devi of > Hinglaj are all associated with Naths. Of course Matsendra gave a new life > to it. > Nath believes Shiva becomes shava(a dead body) without Satki. and the > philosophy is the unification od Shiva with Sakti(Ardha nari swara). That is > why God is " Dwaitaadwaita bibarjita " to Naths. > Nath never denies Sakti. In fact Pasupata,Kalamukha, Kapalika, Aghori, > sakti all derived from Nathism. > > Brahminism/Vedic religion is only a refined/modified religion. > > You are right to say that all were originally tribal and religions were > tribal religions, and gradually integration started with a lot of > refinement,what we termed as Vedic/Brahminic religion. > > However, in Vedic religion there is no place of Female Gods. The > recognized Vedic Gods are Indra, Mitra, Varuna , Nisatiya etc. > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted October 27, 2009 Speaking of Naths, the work of Narendranath Bhattacharya is a great place to start in documenting the deep origins of Devi. The Indian Mother Goddess, The Shakta Religion, and other books. >However, in Vedic religion there is no place of Female Gods. The >recognized Vedic Gods are Indra, Mitra, Varuna , Nisatiya etc. Though I can't agree with your categorical denial of goddesses in Vedic religion, I do know that they are mentioned far less than the gods, and are sometimes even described as being abused by them (see Indra vs. Ushas). Max -- Max Dashu Suppressed Histories Archives: Real women, global vision http://www.suppressedhistories.net Women's Power DVD http://www.suppressedhistories.net/womenspowerdvd.html Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted October 27, 2009 Dear Sir, Entire Vedic religion was made for Male dominated society, for the benefits of Brahmins only. There was no place of Women in that society. At a later date, gradually female characters entered due to tremendous influence of east Indian people and ultimately female gods were found to be in dominance. Regarding Sakti literature Good historical books are available, eg: 1) Sakta mata by Dr. Yadu Vamsi, 2) Ancient history of India by Sunil Chatterjee 3) History of bengali literature by prof. Sunity Kr. Chatterjee Regards. --- On Tue, 27/10/09, Max Dashu <maxdashu wrote: Speaking of Naths, the work of Narendranath Bhattacharya is a great place to start in documenting the deep origins of Devi. The Indian Mother Goddess, The Shakta Religion, and other books. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted October 27, 2009 I could not find these Suktas in Vedas. I will be happy if you can guide me by providing, the name of the Veda, Mandala no, Sukta no and sloka number. I have replied on your mail itself. Kindly go thru . --- On Mon, 26/10/09, gopal narayan <gopalnarayan123 wrote: gopal narayan <gopalnarayan123 jai gurudev, dear friend pls read rigved,srisuktam, durga suktam,ratrisukta, etc is there. pls read atharvaved : sridevi atharvasheesh dedicated to maa adi shakti lalita tripurasundari is there.she is called devmata,jaganmata etc... the panchadashi mantra is very clearly given in it and so also navaran mantra is given in it along with hidden meaning. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted October 27, 2009 Namaste, Forgive my interjection, but I always understood the origins of Shaktism being pre-Vedic and it is why some would argue it predating other schools of thought. However, its popularity or its moving from an indigenous religion to a more recognized religion could be another matter from this. Just my thoughts. Jai Maa, Sincerely, Arya/Christina Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted October 27, 2009 *Entire Vedic religion was made for Male dominated society, for the benefits of Brahmins only * * * *Thats a sweeping generalization. Some body in a very smart alec fashion said :* *All Generalizations are false including this one * what about the Gayatri Mantra ? I am sure you DO think it is from the Rigved. You seem to be here on a mission to incite people into an argument arnt you ? FIRST , you claim Devi Worship is not as old as generally believed by most of us here. AND that it was usurped from Buddhism and Jainism (of ALL, Jainism AFAIK is agnostic to any of this). Having failed in your first endeavour you Start again by making another sweeping statement === VEDIC society blah blah Brahmin Bashing Blah blah Male dominance Blah blah. Regards Aditya Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted October 28, 2009 Kshamaasheelamashaktaanaam shaktaanaam bhooshanam khsamaa Tranjlajun: For the weak forgiving is a necessary tool and for the strong it is an adornment. --- On Tue, 10/27/09, Abhijit Dasgupta <abhijitdasgupta92 wrote: Abhijit Dasgupta <abhijitdasgupta92 Re: Shakti peethas Tuesday, October 27, 2009, 2:55 PM Dear Sir, Entire Vedic religion was made for Male dominated society, for the benefits of Brahmins only. There was no place of Women in that society. At a later date, gradually female characters entered due to tremendous influence of east Indian people and ultimately female gods were found to be in dominance. Regarding Sakti literature Good historical books are available, eg: 1) Sakta mata by Dr. Yadu Vamsi, 2) Ancient history of India by Sunil Chatterjee 3) History of bengali literature by prof. Sunity Kr. Chatterjee Regards. --- On Tue, 27/10/09, Max Dashu <maxdashu (AT) lmi (DOT) net> wrote: Speaking of Naths, the work of Narendranath Bhattacharya is a great place to start in documenting the deep origins of Devi. The Indian Mother Goddess, The Shakta Religion, and other books. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted October 28, 2009 My dear Aditya Kr. Jha, There should not be any bashing on any community. This is my personal feeling. However when truth comes out, some times it may be bitter to digest , I recall a very nice movie in Kanada by name " Vamsha Briksha " ., It is a story of a very disciplined orthodox Brhahmin, who tried to maintain all Brahminical duties throughout his life and was trying to educate all accordingly.At the end he was completely shattered, when he came to know that he was fathered by a non Brahmin male. The point is ,one must have a big heart to accept the truth,as truth is bitter. Well, you asked about Gayatri, It is addressed to Sun(Male), not addressed to a female. Well, one doubt, why Is " OM " prefixed in Gayatri Sloka? If not then how ,when and why " OM " was prefixed to Gayatri or it was there in the original Gayatri? I expect a point to point reply from you. The way you are questioning the authenticity of others, I hope you will give reply appropriately to the point. I am here to share information not for arguments with other learned members, I expect the same from others. Comming to Devi worship, Comments were made based on the observations of Historians, researchers, and not based on the voice of Mythologists. I have given references for that. If you have any recorded evidence ,supported by historians ,researchers or archiologists, you are well come. With regards Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted October 28, 2009 jai gurudev have u actually read atharvaved ??? if u did u will know. reg durga suktam,u can simply google and find out. like ganapati atharvasheesh there r 5 atharvasheesh and one of them is sridevi atharvasheesh. it has become fashionable to do hindubashing,vedbashing, brahmanbashing.buddhists,xtian and muslims r actually paid by their sponsors to do hindu bashing for doing conversions,and unsavory stuff. the saptarishi and mother arundhati r well known they r all vedic seers so u cant make false statement that no women were vedic seers. if there was no place for women in vedic times or vedic literature, why there is a marrige of man and woman in front of agnidev and invocations of gods for the mariage between man and woman. why not a simple nikah ceremony which is a mere contract between man and woman and not a spiritual union ??? in rigved srisuktam etc r there. pls dont rely on anti hindu terrorists disguised as intellectuals. pls read ved,u will know. finally the male gods in ved r not actually human males with dna that they will oppress human women. these r elemental gods,ie part of mother adi shakti lalita tripurasudnari param prakkruti. and we humans male and female r part of same divinity. these elemental gods include : sun,indra,varun,vayu,mitra,etc....ie all gods r elemental gods. pls pls pls understand the facts clearly. if u r in india i am willing to send u copy of sridevi atharvasheesh, by courier free of cost. om shakti gopal On 10/27/09, Abhijit Dasgupta <abhijitdasgupta92 wrote: > > > > I could not find these Suktas in Vedas. > > I will be happy if you can guide me by providing, the name of the Veda, > Mandala no, Sukta no and sloka number. > > I have replied on your mail itself. Kindly go thru . > > --- On Mon, 26/10/09, gopal narayan <gopalnarayan123<gopalnarayan123%40gmail.com>> > wrote: > > gopal narayan <gopalnarayan123<gopalnarayan123%40gmail.com> > > > > jai gurudev, > > dear friend > > pls read rigved,srisuktam, durga suktam,ratrisukta, etc is there. > > pls read atharvaved : > > sridevi atharvasheesh dedicated to maa adi shakti lalita tripurasundari > > is there.she is called devmata,jaganmata etc... > > the panchadashi mantra is very clearly given in it and so > > also navaran mantra is given in it along with hidden meaning. > > -- ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++\ +++++++ TRUTH PATH DESTINATION GOAL REAL ADIGURU SALVATION KARMA DESTINY AND ALL THAT EXISTS IS ONLY SUPREME NATURE SUPREME ENERGY DIVINE MOTHER ADI SHAKTI MAHAKAALI MAHALAXMI MAHASARASWATI LALITA TRIPURA SUNDARI KULKUNDALINI PARMESHWARI SHE IS THE ONLY BEING IN EXISTANCE AND WE ARE ALL PART OF HER Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted October 28, 2009 Namaste, I probably have much to be corrected on, but I thought I would chip in what I know. This is as someone who comes from a Western society, but also one who does all in her power to recognize the biases imposed by her own society. Outsider and insider viewpoints acting dialectically tends to bring the most accurate results, I suppose some could say. Based on my limited understanding, there are some societies who had a history of patriarchy in India. I have read a number of historical textbooks by people who tried to look at India's cultures more fairly, so I do not think it is solely a colonial bias at that point... on the other hand, like I suggested (in the form of a question) when this one woman brahmin lectured in my class in the USA, there were some matriarchy states, too. Nonetheless, I do agree and understand that a significant number of the verses in the Vedas, as well as a number of the Puranas, were written by female spiritual masters. So in theory women have a significant place in Vedic history. In practice, some places may not have made it so much while we have matriarchy societies elsewhere. This may have possibly been a scenario before invasions from western forces (it is not to say they did not impose a bias on other aspects of the culture). I really did not want to question the speaker because I think people usually know about the implications of their own culture better than others. However, she also said a number of things that seemed to contradict what I learned here and in my readings, and what I learned from a former teacher assistant who came from South India. If we look at the different schools of thought, Vaishnava, Shaiva, and Shakta thought, there is varying emphasis when it comes to gender roles. Certain groups have a more prevalent influence in some places compared to others, at least publicly...so I do not think it is a complete surprise to see this kind of variety. A lot of generalized anthropology books suggest goddess worship came before worshiping gods. This theory suggests part of it is because women are the ones who give life and can " go days in a month bleeding without dying. " Whether this holds accurate in this case is another matter of debate. However, it would not surprise me if it was the case and later on, patriarchy started to become a trend. Again, I have much to learn, and will be the first to admit such. Jai Ma. Sincerely, Arya/Christina On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 1:45 AM, gopal narayan <gopalnarayan123wrote: > > > jai gurudev > > have u actually read atharvaved ??? > > if u did u will know. > > reg durga suktam,u can simply google > and find out. > > like ganapati atharvasheesh there r 5 atharvasheesh > and one of them is sridevi atharvasheesh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted October 29, 2009 >>>>>>Well, you asked about Gayatri, >>>>>>It is addressed to Sun(Male), not addressed to a female.  Can you explain from your historical reason why this is so? I am ready to believe that all the smritis authors who defined the vedic sandhya vandanam around gayatri / savitri in its present form were much more stupid than the present historians and got it all wrong. They had no clue about the mantra and misunderstood it as devi (since all their gayatri dhyanas are all referring to a distinctly female god who is also identified with the sun....it is another matter that sun itself has female aspect and is worshiped as a female in kerala)  But I want to hear and understand why these guys were so terribly wrong? >>>>>>Well, one doubt, why Is " OM " prefixed in Gayatri Sloka? If not then >>>>>>how ,when and why " OM " was prefixed to Gayatri or it was there in the original >>>>>>Gayatri? I expect a point to point reply from you.  So when OM is prefixed it becomes a male god?? What about 'om hrim strim hum phat' or 'Oṃ TÄre TuttÄre Ture SvÄhÄ'? This is not only female but a mantra of which is distinctly veda bhaya so to say...  I know some mula vidyas like panchadasi are not to be prefixed with om or tritari (but only during japa). While other bijas are also pranava's, om is shukla pranava which symbolizes and captures the dissolution process to the point and is natural to be prefixed before anything which symbolizes birth - and hence any other bija.Om is to chanted in the out breath while the deity in the in-breath.  But further and more importantly, this is a tantric concept (and i may be all wrong in these matters) - but how does this apply to the vedic savitri being male or female?? (apart from the fact that it seems also incorrect from tantra view as well).  Let me know your views.  Regards. --- On Wed, 28/10/09, Abhijit Dasgupta <abhijitdasgupta92 wrote: Abhijit Dasgupta <abhijitdasgupta92 Re: Shakti peethas Wednesday, 28 October, 2009, 8:55 AM  My dear Aditya Kr. Jha, There should not be any bashing on any community. This is my personal feeling. However when truth comes out, some times it may be bitter to digest , I recall a very nice movie in Kanada by name " Vamsha Briksha " ., It is a story of a very disciplined orthodox Brhahmin, who tried to maintain all Brahminical duties throughout his life and was trying to educate all accordingly. At the end he was completely shattered, when he came to know that he was fathered by a non Brahmin male. The point is ,one must have a big heart to accept the truth,as truth is bitter. Well, you asked about Gayatri, It is addressed to Sun(Male), not addressed to a female. Well, one doubt, why Is " OM " prefixed in Gayatri Sloka? If not then how ,when and why " OM " was prefixed to Gayatri or it was there in the original Gayatri? I expect a point to point reply from you. The way you are questioning the authenticity of others, I hope you will give reply appropriately to the point. I am here to share information not for arguments with other learned members, I expect the same from others. Comming to Devi worship, Comments were made based on the observations of Historians, researchers, and not based on the voice of Mythologists. I have given references for that. If you have any recorded evidence ,supported by historians ,researchers or archiologists, you are well come. With regards  Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted October 29, 2009 jai gurudev i agree with u mitraji. om = akar-ukar-makar = satya chit anand. ie om is satchitanand,and this is the vigraha of maa herself. it is used for all app's and all gods and goddesses. many mantra dedicated to mother like panchadashi,dakshinkaali mantra etc dont use om. but many mantras deicated to mother like baglamukhi,pratyangira,kamala,mangalchandika, rudrachamunda,raktachamunda etc use om. sridurga kavach starts with : om yadguhyam paramloke so also for many other kavach,stotra etc of mother. it has become fashionable to not read ved or puran and not get enuf knowledge and then do hindu bashing,ved bashing etc,and this is supported by pseudo secular media also. and fault lies with us,that we r not spreading knowledge properly.so we have to strive more and do more efforts to educate world abt sanatan dharma and shakti sadhana. om shakti gopal Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted October 30, 2009 Dear Mr. Gopal Narayan, I requested you to mention the Mandala no, sukta no, and verse no and name of the Veda. Anybody familiar with Vedas knows all these. My sincere request to you to avoid spinning stories in stead of replying to points for query.and please politicize the issue in the name of caste, community etc. If you do not know, accept the fact gracefully .Your prestige will not go down for this act.All learned member will try try to help you in getting the answear. Please Please do not play Politics. Regards. --- On Wed, 28/10/09, gopal narayan <gopalnarayan123 wrote: gopal narayan jai gurudev have u actually read atharvaved ??? if u did u will know. reg durga suktam,u can simply google and find out. like ganapati atharvasheesh there r 5 atharvasheesh and one of them is sridevi atharvasheesh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted October 30, 2009 Friends, My query was addressed to Mr. Jha, not yo Mr Maitra. I think, I could not properly describe about my query. Once again let me try as bellow: 1) I was asked by Mr. Jha on Gayatri, Gayatri of Rig Veda as per Vedic explanation it is addressed to Aditya(SUN). Mr. Maitra as well Mr. Jha must be aware of this ,being both member of Vedic Brahmin community. 2) My query was now Why " OM " was added prior to this Sloka? 3) When, Why and How " OM "  got connected with Gayatri sloka? Plese be noted that we are discussing on the above issue. It has nothing to do with Kerala or Bengal or caste. Let us not try to deviate from the point of discussion. Further to this,now Mr. Maitra giving examples of " om hrim strim hum phat' or 'Oṃ TÄre TuttÄre Ture SvÄhÄ " . Well to my knowledge the above has nothing to do with Gayatri, as these are definitely not part of Veda or any Vedic literature. Mr. Maitra must be more knowledgeable due to his ancestry. and origin on this issue. I need these answear. I will be grateful to learned members for helping me in this regard. Regards --- On Thu, 29/10/09, Saikat Maitra <singhi_kaya wrote: Saikat Maitra <singhi_kaya Re: Shakti peethas Thursday, 29 October, 2009, 5:25 AM Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted October 30, 2009 jai gurudev dear friend, i used to do sridevi atharvasheesh from atharved copy i had,but for over 10-12 yrs i am doing from geetapress sridurga saptashati book. so pls give me few days,i will get back to u with the same. i do not play politics,and also ask u to search same. i will get back to u,soon. om shakti gopal On 10/30/09, Abhijit Dasgupta <abhijitdasgupta92 wrote: > > Dear Mr. Gopal Narayan, > > I requested you to mention the Mandala no, sukta no, and verse no and name > of the Veda. > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted October 30, 2009 Abhijit I guess you have meandered quite a bit. First of lets segregate the two issues :- 1. 1st Issue : How old is Devi Worship 2. Second Issue : Did the vedas/vedic religion involve Devi Worship On the first you contended that Devi Worship was " usurped " from Buddhism and Jainism. I have never heard of any jain sect involved in Devi Worship. Nor have my Jain friends been able to have heard anything about it.Last time I checked its preachings bordered on atheism. Buddhism on the other hand has sects which practices Tantra (Tibetan Buddhism). But what is the irrefutable proof you furnish to proof that Tantra in Hinduism was usurped/copied/borrowed (suit urself) from Buddhism ? If anything it was the other way round. thanks Aditya On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 7:46 AM, gopal narayan <gopalnarayan123wrote: > > > jai gurudev > > dear friend, > > i used to do sridevi atharvasheesh from atharved copy i had,but for over > 10-12 yrs i am doing > from geetapress sridurga saptashati book. > > so pls give me few days,i will get back to u with the same. > > i do not play politics,and also ask u to search same. > > i will get back to u,soon. > > om shakti > > gopal > > > On 10/30/09, Abhijit Dasgupta <abhijitdasgupta92<abhijitdasgupta92%40.in>> > wrote: > > > > Dear Mr. Gopal Narayan, > > > > I requested you to mention the Mandala no, sukta no, and verse no and > name > > of the Veda. > > > > > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted October 30, 2009 Namaste: Respectfully, while the original Vedic Gayatri mantra is addressed to the male Aditya Savitr, in modern days the mantra has become deified as the Goddess Gayatri. The structure of the mantra has become so popular and profound that countless different " gayatris " exist for different devatas. Some may wonder why a mantra to masculine aspect of the Sun has transformed into a modern day goddess. Many would claim this is change from Vedic tradition becoming influenced by Tantra and Shaktaa worship. But even in the Vedas, *Speech* is feminine! The goddess Vac is mentioned in famous " Devi Suktam " - Rg Veda 10.125, where she proclaims herself as the voice of creation. http://sacred-texts.com/hin/rigveda/rv10125.htm -S. Santo Sengupta " Aum Shanti Shanti Shantih. " Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted October 31, 2009 What you say below is good. Also, Surya would have originally been feminine, like her linguistic cousins in Lithuanian (Saulé), Celtic (Sul), etc. The sun was a goddess in the ancient Proto-Indo-European cultures. But quite a bit of water has passed under the bridge since then, especially when you look at the story of disobedient wife Savitri being replaced with Gayatri. Max >Respectfully, while the original Vedic Gayatri mantra is addressed to the >male Aditya Savitr, in modern days the mantra has become deified as the >Goddess Gayatri. The structure of the mantra has become so popular and >profound that countless different " gayatris " exist for different devatas. > >Some may wonder why a mantra to masculine aspect of the Sun has transformed >into a modern day goddess. Many would claim this is change from Vedic >tradition becoming influenced by Tantra and Shaktaa worship. But even in >the Vedas, *Speech* is feminine! The goddess Vac is mentioned in famous > " Devi Suktam " - Rg Veda 10.125, where she proclaims herself as the voice of >creation. > ><http://sacred-texts.com/hin/rigveda/rv10125.htm>http://sacred-texts.com/hin/ri\ gveda/rv10125.htm > >-S. Santo Sengupta > " Aum Shanti Shanti Shantih. " -- Max Dashu Suppressed Histories Archives: Real women, global vision http://www.suppressedhistories.net Women's Power DVD http://www.suppressedhistories.net/womenspowerdvd.html Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 1, 2009 Ssri Mathre Namaha Dear Adityaji don't try to prove you are very smart. discussions ought to be healthier way, not like proving 'who's the smartest' pls. do not intimidate others. bhuvana --- On Fri, 30/10/09, Aditya Kumar Jha <aditya.kr.jha wrote: Aditya Kumar Jha <aditya.kr.jha Re: Shakti peethas Cc: " Abhijit Dasgupta " <abhijitdasgupta92 Friday, 30 October, 2009, 2:50 PM Abhijit I guess you have meandered quite a bit. First of lets segregate the two issues :- 1. 1st Issue : How old is Devi Worship 2. Second Issue : Did the vedas/vedic religion involve Devi Worship On the first you contended that Devi Worship was " usurped " from Buddhism and Jainism. I have never heard of any jain sect involved in Devi Worship. Nor have my Jain friends been able to have heard anything about it.Last time I checked its preachings bordered on atheism. Buddhism on the other hand has sects which practices Tantra (Tibetan Buddhism). But what is the irrefutable proof you furnish to proof that Tantra in Hinduism was usurped/copied/ borrowed (suit urself) from Buddhism ? If anything it was the other way round. thanks Aditya On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 7:46 AM, gopal narayan <gopalnarayan123@ gmail.com>wrote: > > > jai gurudev > > dear friend, > > i used to do sridevi atharvasheesh from atharved copy i had,but for over > 10-12 yrs i am doing > from geetapress sridurga saptashati book. > > so pls give me few days,i will get back to u with the same. > > i do not play politics,and also ask u to search same. > > i will get back to u,soon. > > om shakti > > gopal > > > On 10/30/09, Abhijit Dasgupta <abhijitdasgupta92@ .in<abhijitdasgupta92% 40.in> > > wrote: > > > > Dear Mr. Gopal Narayan, > > > > I requested you to mention the Mandala no, sukta no, and verse no and > name > > of the Veda. > > > > > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 1, 2009 , Buwaneshwari Ramatas <khiravani wrote: > > Ssri Mathre Namaha > > Dear Adityaji > > don't try to prove you are very smart. discussions ought to be healthier way, not like proving 'who's the smartest' pls. do not intimidate others. > > bhuvana Do you know what I think of all these..............a natural human tendency. Its all about this need.........this desire to show to prove that we know so much and that we are better than the other. So its just natural. Where all this will lead us, I'm just watching. Its interesting to see how we get ourselves trap in our own illusion. And then we get ourselves tired and drag, and we wonder why are we not getting to our " goals " and why this journey is taking such a long time. So my take is.... for some, its very important to them. To argue and wanting to prove that they are right... and others are wrong. They want to prove a point whatever point that is, who cares. But their voice must be heard..by all.. must be acknowledge by others. As I was reading all these, I'm reminded of a book introduce to me by a good friend... " The Power of Now " You see we are all trap in this situation. Its either we are in the past or we constantly think about the future. We never bother to look at the present.. the now. Be conscious of our own self and our action. I always believe that NOW is very important and powerful by itself. NOW is when the past and the future meet. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
