Shaktism, "only for Siddhis"

[Nyingjé Tso]

I'm still trying to figure out who these few Vaishnava and Shaiva scholars/acharya-s/guru-s are that state that the former two are viable though one of the two is the best, while Shaktism is still the worst and is not viable for moksha. Their sub-sect identification, and names, etc.. would be a breakthrough for this conversation. It would have provided specifics.

I am not comfortable throwing books, name and sampraday like that as would like this thread not to become some kind of flame war or something, and it would be disrespectful and I don't want to be disrespectful to fellow Hindus. This thread wasn't for denuncing people, this is why I don't want to speak about it here. I wanted to know if these people had a valid reason to say so or not, and it seems that they do not.
I see no problem to discuss it in private, however, if you want :0

 

[Poeticus]

I am not comfortable throwing books, name and sampraday like that as would like this thread not to become some kind of flame war or something, and it would be disrespectful and I don't want to be disrespectful to fellow Hindus. This thread wasn't for denuncing people, this is why I don't want to speak about it here. I wanted to know if these people had a valid reason to say so or not, and it seems that they do not.
I see no problem to discuss it in private, however, if you want :0

... Yes, please feel free to PM me with the requested info. And of course not, it wasn't to disrespect fellow Hindus and nor was it to denounce their guru-s, don't worry obviously not, but in relation to theological interactions of various Hindu sects, I asked sub-sect and acharya identification to get a more contextual picture in regards to theological validity.

 

[Vinayaka]

I'm still trying to figure out who these few Vaishnava and Shaiva scholars/acharya-s/guru-s are that state that the former two are viable though one of the two is the best, while Shaktism is still the worst and is not viable for moksha. Their sub-sect identification, and names, etc.. would be a breakthrough for this conversation. It would have provided specifics.

I've never read it either, but then I don't read a lot.

 

[Asha]

Now my question is this: which other peeps on the planet invoke goddesses when they charge into the face of death ?

since the times of roman Britain Britaina the Female personification of this land has led men into battle ....she is our protectoress

 

[Asha]

Vanakkam,


I wanted to bring something up, since I have read around the interwebz some very interesting stuff about Shaktism, but also very ... Let's say intriguing.

Many scholars of traditionnal Vaisnav and Shaiva sampraday doesn't seems to accept Shaktism as a valid path to Moksha. Some goes even further, saying Shaktism is only a way to gain Siddhis and material boons that doesn't lead to moksha. A very few are hostile, saying it is only a remain of kul devis worship plagued by superstition and black magic, and that is certainly not a valid or even a "dharmic" path.



So why this disdain and hostility from some Vaisnav/Saiva scholars and devotees ? Is it only a matter of "my sampraday is better than yours" or is there a real debate or scriptural problem with Shaktism being or not a way to moksha ?



Please not that this thread is not to be taken as hostile toward any Vaisnav or Saiva here, I am merely talking about individuals from some specific sampraday. Now, the question I asked in this thread is a sincere question, so please be gentle not to turn this thread into a "mine is better" war, thank you.

Vanakkam Mataji

Please take this as gentlely said, ....WHO ARE THESE INDIVIDUALS you are speaking of ?

Without knowing what you are making reference to it is almost impossible to comment.

Jai Shree Krishna

 

[Poeticus]

since the times of roman Britain Britaina the Female personification of this land has led men into battle ....she is our protectoress

Just one ? Keep in mind, I used the term, goddesses. And was she invoked as a battle cry, representative of an actual goddess or was it just an ethnic-related, patriotic abstract ? Also, invoke was in the present tense.

 

[Asha]

Just one ? Keep in mind, I used the term, goddesses. And was she invoked as a battle cry, representative of an actual goddess or was it just an ethnic-related, patriotic abstract ? Also, invoke was in the present tense.

You would be pleased to know that the Celts here had / have many goddesses which are to them more important than the male figures, but the Christians ran such practices underground so now they exist only in the Pagan diaspora. sorry this is not realy my subject but I have freinds that would be able to tell you.

as far as invoking the protection of Britania I am sure that has allmost died out too but to the navy she was very important.

sadly allmost everything here has been reduced to a level of patriotic sentimentality.

 

[Poeticus]

You would be pleased to know that the Celts here had / have many goddesses which are to them more important than the male figures, but the Christians ran such practices underground so now they exist only in the Pagan diaspora. sorry this is not realy my subject but I have freinds that would be able to tell you.

as far as invoking the protection of Britania I am sure that has allmost died out too but to the navy she was very important.

sadly allmost everything here has been reduced to a level of patriotic sentimentality.

I am well aware of the misery and ill-fortune that has befallen upon my pagan brothers and sisters of old yore of the noble land of goddess Britannia, and thus please pardon my initial smugness. It would be honorable for her worship to go from mythical to once more a tangible reality. Instead, historically it seems, adoration for her ritualistically died out and then went to the praising of a queen so her crown could be adorned with gems and diamonds from far away lands and their peoples treacherously conquered.

 

[Jainarayan]

Ah I see. I can say that you are one of the few exceptions to my comment, as I've seen most Shaivas and Vaishnavas completely intolerant to each other.

My experience with temples is limited, to say the least. However, the temple I go to is huge and accommodates a wide range of deities, sampradayas and geographical locations in India. Deities include Sri Guruvayurappan, the presiding deity; Sri Shiva; Kannika Parameshwari and the major goddesses; Mahaganapati; Sri Hanuman; the Dasavatara and other avatars of Vishnu, several of them in their own sanctums; Sri Hanuman; Sri Ayyappa; Sri Subramanya; and there are more. Virtually everyone you see come into the temple "makes the rounds" to every sanctum, and there are a lot of people. I see people attending a Vishnu puja as well a Shiva puja (including me), back to back. Even the priests, whose sampradaya you can generally tell by their tilaka and vibhuti, participate and assist in pujas to any of the deities. The point of this is that you cannot tell what devotee belongs to what sampradaya. The temple and devotees are all-encompassing and egalitarian. No one, not even the priests snub any deities or other devotees.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Yes, there's even a few temples in the north east where she s the presiding deity.

Why, in Mumbai too, Mahalakshmi temple. Many temples are known as Laxmi Narayana temples (Birla Mandir in Delhi). Mahalakshmi temple of Panaji Goa, also one in Kolhapur. There are innumerable Lakshmi temples.

 

[Asha]

I am well aware of the misery and ill-fortune that has befallen upon my pagan brothers and sisters of old yore of the noble land of goddess Britannia, and thus please pardon my initial smugness. It would be honorable for her worship to go from mythical to once more a tangible reality. Instead, historically it seems, adoration for her ritualistically died out and then went to the praising of a queen so her crown could be adorned with gems and diamonds from far away lands and their peoples treacherously conquered.

OK, ... so we canot start a fight over which Vaisnava or Shivite has belittled Devi worshipers, So Let the fight begin over the Diamonds !

Ahh hhh ...who cares let the earth open up and let Bhumi Devi have them back !

Please note, .. I am Vaisnava and I just said 'Bhumi Devi' whom we hold in high regard as we do Tulasi Maharani.

I am half wondering whether the perceived problem is the manner of worship ? but without any refference this tread is impossible to answer as even to assume is dangerous.

 

[Chakra]

Deleted

 

[Aupmanyav]

It is not Hinduism to denigrate any God and Goddess in the Hindu pantheon whatever one's chosen deity be. Bengalis call girls as 'maa' and the South Indians call them as 'amma'. Girls are not allowed to actually touch the feet of fathers. During Navaratra, men and women touch the feet of pre-pubescent girls. Nepal has a living Devi (her life is much better now then once it was). Whether it is Shaivism (will anyone forget Mata Parvati?) or Vaishnavism (will anyone forget Matas Sita, Rukmani or Radha), none is complete without worshiping Shakti. Let the Oxford people say whatever they want to, Hindus find equal solace in Kali, Durga, or Laxmi or any other Goddess (Hinglaj for example or Adi Shakti or Yellamma, for that matter). Jai Bholenath, don't worry, worship of Goddesses is the oldest form of worship in the world, and even in India. It will continue eternally. Mohenjodaro Goddess idol and early BCE Lakshmi seal from Magadha:

 

[Poeticus]

... as even to assume is dangerous.

... precisely.

 

[JaiMaaDurga]

Namaste,

Some of this will be a bit off-topic, and for that I apologize in advance.

Upon seeing "Britannia", I could not help but think to myself "Hmm, a lion and a
trident.." Not quite Dawon and trishul, but what is interesting to me is the use
of symbolism derived from those who invaded and conquered Britain in order to
personify the British Empire (her trident is symbolic of Poseidon/Neptune, to
show mastery of the seas, i .e. British naval power, and did not appear widely until
the Victorian era). Even the name "Britannia" is Roman in origin.
Which leads to the thought- perhaps AIT was the result of projection- Europeans
seeing their own past everywhere they looked?

It was this "Britannia" that necessitated Bharata Mata.

For a "British goddess" the Celtic Brigantia/Brigid, or the Saxon Frige, would be
possible answers, but not a national personification draped in triumphalism.

I am not wishing to provoke, only sharing observations.

JAI MATA DI

 

[Asha]

Namaste,

Some of this will be a bit off-topic, and for that I apologize in advance.

Namaste,

I think we are all off topic now , so I hope no one minds ?

Upon seeing "Britannia", I could not help but think to myself "Hmm, a lion and a
trident.." Not quite Dawon and trishul, but what is interesting to me is the use
of symbolism derived from those who invaded and conquered Britain in order to
personify the British Empire (her trident is symbolic of Poseidon/Neptune, to
show mastery of the seas, i .e. British naval power, and did not appear widely until
the Victorian era). Even the name "Britannia" is Roman in origin.
Which leads to the thought- perhaps AIT was the result of projection- Europeans
seeing their own past everywhere they looked?

As British, we no longer realy know who we are ? we have been invaded and subdugated so many times and only in a wew far flung corners are there remnants of the indiginous race ? and even these prehaps came over from Britany, frankly what does it even matter this body is a temporary home and who knows where we resided before ?

so what is British I do not know all I know is that aryan means noble

It was this "Britannia" that necessitated Bharata Mata.

sorry I dont understand please explain

For a "British goddess" the Celtic Brigantia/Brigid, or the Saxon Frige, would be
possible answers, but not a national personification draped in triumphalism.

I am not wishing to provoke, only sharing observations.

JAI MATA DI

it seems that these personifications become adopted as an when it suits, and forever being exploited to justify some cause, valid or not ?


P.S. no provocation taken

Jai sri Krishna

 

[Chakra]

I'm not sure if my other responses have been helpful or not, but I have been thinking about this topic and I think I may have another reason for why Vaishnavas treat Shaktism as such.

*Vaishnava POV*

According to some schools of Vaishnavism, Durga is also called Yogamaya. She is the "superintendent" of this material world. Basically, she is "maya personified". She is not bad or anything, it is just that she is ordered by the Lord to keep the jivas in maya. Durga literally means "hard to conquer", just like maya is very hard to overcome. Shiva, her husband, has a different title. " vaiṣṇavānāṁ yathā śambhuḥ". Shiva is the Parama Vaishnava, the leader of all Vaishnava, and their lord. He is also one of the mahajanas mentioned in the Bhagavatam. Now, we can see there is a difference between the roles of both Shiva and Durga, with Shiva having a more "positive" role. Again, Durga is not seem as a "bad" person, but she is the "warden of the jail", so to speak. That is why maybe Vaishnavas think that by worshiping Shiva (the foremost Vaishnava), you will get association of a great Vaishnava and then be purified. However, by worshiping Durga, you may become more attracted to "maya" etc.

I feel that this may also be a plausible reason for why Vaishnavas look down upon Shaktism more than Shaivism, but those guys are really a minority. IMHO, Shaivism and SHaktism go hand in hand. If you are going to disagree with both, I don't think criticizing one more than the other makes sense. Also, I do not actually believe in the view that I just stated above; I believe worshiping Durga will give the same results as worshiping Shiva. I did not mean to offend anyone. Hope this helps.
Regards

 

[ratikala]

namaskaram

I am in agreement with the post above ,

However I also find it difficult to comment without any references to the oppositions refered to ,

there has been much missunderstanding over this topic in the past and un nececary offence taken .....

however to a vaisnava who follows the word of Sri Krsna it is common place to accept the word of Sri Bhagavan , when in the Bhagavad Gita he says , ...


“One can understand Me as I am, as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, only by devotional service. And when one is in full consciousness of Me by such devotion, he can enter into the kingdom of God.” ch ..18 v ..55

here this word Supreme to a vaisnava gives Sri Krsna presedence above all other expansions ,

it is in no way intended as a slur upon any other form when the gita refers to ''Demigods'' it is simply that these expansions , expand for the purpose of fulfilling particular functions and that does not take away from the fact that at times culturaly hindus pray to these individual expansions for particular blessings , to Urma for a good husband , to Saraswati for learning .....etc , etc ....this is their function ....

yet sometimes these functions are considered to be material as they pertain to worldly existance ....

therefore when it is said in the gita

“Men of small intelligence worship the demigods, and their fruits are limited and temporary. Those who worship the demigods go to the planets of the demigods, but My devotees ultimately reach My supreme planet.” ch ..7 V ..23


it is not intended to insult those who worship the expansions of the supreme , but simply to explain that one who takes the worship of an expansion beliving that expansion to be the supreme , and who do not recognise the supreme to be the source of all expansions , ...upon death goes to the temporary abode of that expansion rather than the eternal abode of the supreme .
This is not intended to cause offence merely to be informative , please remember this is Sri Krsna speaking so we should try to understand what he is saying before we imperfect souls find reason to find fault in the word of Sri Bhagavan .


I can think of many quotes which may have caused this question but these can only be discussed if we are willing to put rivalry aside and speak out of genuine interest as to why such things may have been said .



Again there is no wish to offend on my part .

pranamas

 

[Aupmanyav]

.. perhaps AIT was the result of projection- Europeans seeing their own past everywhere they looked?

Well, Indians might be seeing their own in Zeus (Dyaus Pitar) and Ouranos (Varuna) and so many stories in Greek and Celt mythology. AIT is not the result of such desires but the search in History. But, yes, this is not the topic to discuss that. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Indo-European

Time-line of Indo-European cultures: Bug-Dniester (6th millennium), Samara (5th millennium), Kvalynsk (5th millennium), Sredny Stog (mid-5th to mid-4th millennia), Dnieper-Donets (5th to 4th millennia), Usatovo culture (late 4th millennium), Maikop-Dereivka (mid-4th to mid-3rd millennia), Yamna (Pit Grave): This is itself a varied cultural horizon, spanning the entire Pontic-Caspian steppe from the mid-4th to the 3rd millennium BC.