Great Symbols Of Indian Mythology and it's importance in this Yuga! - Page 5

Originally posted by: Banjaaran.

why only durga ma? why not maa lakshmi?

but now my doubts are cleared. if she is aadi shakti then she would be the chosen one to slay the demon.
but she created the trinity.

Originally posted by: KanhaKiChutki

Tha, in most sources I have read, Lord Shiva is referred to as the Destroyer, while Lord Brahma and Lord Vishnu are the Creator, and Presever, though Ultimately MahaVishnu is all. I am rather interested in the Lord Shiva as the Creator theory, though, could you link me up?

Originally posted by: KrishnaPriyaa

Read the Shiva Mahapuran I sent you 😛

Originally posted by: KrishnaPriyaa

Read the Shiva Mahapuran I sent you 😛

Originally posted by: Banjaaran.

i don't mean to be pushy or intruding.. but please could i have the shiva purana too. please.
among all gods.. He fascinates me the most.

sorry if i am intruding or something😳.

Originally posted by: Banjaaran.

who is Shakti?

prevedic people worshiped Shiva and Shakti.
puranas gives us detailed description. but shivaites and shaktas or saktas dismiss puranas.
for a long time shivaites and vishnuvaites were at loggerheads.

so who is shakti?
the consort of shiva. yes. then she is another name for maa sati or maa parvati?

why is aadi shakti sometimes referred as maa lakshmi; consort of vishnu?

and who is maa durga?
another manifestation of maa parvati?
or a goddess created out of the energies of the trinity to slay the powerful demon as per some legends?
if it is the latter why would she stop her destruction when Shiva laid down on her path?

Originally posted by: KrishnaPriyaa

Do you want the pdf? Or the link?

Originally posted by: Meself

Ayi jaanemann you're here!! Researching for your myth-fic or what?😉

Firstly understand that the word "myth" in Greek means story and so does the word "istor" from which history is derived. So if you look into it then both mythology and history boil down to meaning nothing but stories, stories of the great that have achieved a status of the creator.

An anthropologist will give you this definition while a more religious entity would give you an answer that would border on the lines of divinity. The best way to dissect the events is when you strip them off their divine lens and view them as the activities and achievements of mortal who rose to the levels of being immortals. It might sound blasphemous and sacrilegious as well but trust me it is an easier way to understand things at a basic level.

Now to answer your questions. Hinduism is broadly divided into three sects or 'matha' Shaiva matha, Vaishnav matha and the Shakth matha. Each presents their deity as the one who created the universe. The Vaishnavs will tell you it was Vishnu, Shaiva would argue that it was Shiva and subsequently the Shakth ones will claim it was Shakti or Adi-Shakti. It is a question of belief basically which version you'd like to believe. Like I belong to the Shaiv matha so no matter what you argue I will always hold the belief that it started with Shiva. So again I say this is a question of belief.

If you scan history then Vaishnav cult is a very recent cult that rose with the advents of Turks and Mughals. The Dashavatar theory found substance when rapid war between Hinduism and Islam began on Indian subcontinent. This was the time when Vaishnav cult and its theory of ten avatars of Vishnu found a deeper holding among the masses. Before that the Shaiva and the Shakth math were enjoying prominence. Now getting back to your question, Shakti is the Primordial Energy that flows in the universe. It creates, it nurtures and it destroys. It is both nirankaar (without form) and aakaar (with form). She is identified as the consort of Shiva and is associated with power. Power is needed to run the world, to nurture it and to create the same. In Shakh matha there is a line explaining Adi-Shakti: "Vishnu ka sudarsham vo hai, Shiva ka trishul vo hai, Bramha ka gyaan vo hai aur devo ka prakash vo hai." Shakti exists as these flexible form. It is something akin to the Mother Goddess concept of the Western Tribals, though much more complex than that.

Aadi-Shakti in the avatar of a homemaker is Parvati. As a mother she is Gauri, as a warrior she is Durga, as a destroyer/ravager she is Kaali, as the raw, uncontrolled form she is Shyama Kaali or Kaalraatri, as giver of alms she is Annapurna, as a yogini she is Bramhacharini and so on. Different situations and she transforms into different forms; much like we use and convert energy as per our requirements. But Adi-Shakti isalways identified as the consort of Shiva and the cosmic twin/sibling of Vishnu. In some cases she is also addressed as the grand-daughter of Bramha. Thereby she links the Trideva.

Sati was a flawed manifestation of Adi-Shakti, born with the flaws and follies of humans. This avatar was incomplete because Prajapati Daksh (son of Bramha and there by Adi-Shakti is addressed as his grand daughter) had asked her in arrogance and she in order to teach him a lesson had taken birth with those follies. You can interpret it anyway. But Sati, Parvati, Durga, Kaali, Annapurna are all the same, they are different forms of Adi-Shakti.

Parvati is addressed as Narayani. This address is ambiguous. Normally Narayani is identified as Parvati but in Tantra matha ( which worships the raw form of energy) Narayani is Lakshmi and Shivani is Parvati. The balancing forces to Narayana and Shiva respectively. So maybe that is how you heard Parvati being the consort of Vishnu.

Now coming to Durga. The story goes when Parvati took the form of Durga, the warrior form, the gods gifted her the weapons they carried as those weapons truly belong to her. (Refer to that line from Shakth matha above) Vishnu gave her, her Sudarshan that he carried. Shiva returned her the Trishul. Sarang (Vishnu's bow) and Pinak(Shiva's bow) was also returned to her. So was the other weapon such as Indra's thunderbolt and others. Durga was not created as such, that is folktale very popular in Bengal and Odisha along with Jharkhand. But the Shakth and Shaiva matha speak of Parvati taking up that form. Coincide it with that physics rule that energy can neither be created nor destroyed, it can only be transformed from one form to the other. Similarly Adi-Shakti exists on her own, she isn't created nor can she be destroyed. She only takes up multiple forms as and when required.

When Shiva laid himself on her path, she had stepped on her husband, a silly mistake on her part and that is why she stuck out her tongue.

Hope this helps you di.😳

Originally posted by: Banjaaran.

anddd i absolutely love you chotu🤗🤗.
so darn good to see ya. missed you loads my dearest.

I mohabbats you too. I can't contain my elation at seeing you here. Mereko gala faad kar chillana hai!😆 I have a lamba waala PM to send you. And spoiler alert: rainbow post!😆

and THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU for this detailed explanation.
you are a life saver. this got to be the perfect answer to all my questions and confusion. was literally on the verge of pulling my hair with regards to Shiva and Shakti.
it all started with Shiva. and you guessed it right. for my mytho-fic😆. it is based on 'rudraksh'. and then i dunno how i managed to get myself obsessed with Hinduism.
give me a tail and i will managed to attach an entire elephant to it. so yeah.. what started as research of Shiva lead to me doing indepth analysis of vedas and puranas.
and found Shakti so fascinating.

Bring it on I say! Rudraksh.

so a big big thank you for this explanation chotu. it all makes perfect sense now.
literally perfect.

i am not a shivaite. in fact i am a rationalist who believes in gods. not so much in pooja and symbolic gestures. i have faith, i believe and i pray. but i also look for rationale and do not conform to traditions. hence this new journey was daunting. but got to say i am loving this journey.

it is amazing how much of science has gone into vedas. it is just misfortune of colossal proportion that they are 'shruti'.
some parts of manusmriti made me see absolutely red. with the misogyny and racism. but there are lot many good in it too.

Actually our Vedas and Puranas follow the basic scientific principles. If you read analysis by Indologists, you'd realize how much of our Vedic and Pauranic notions are based on scientific principles. Almost everything contained in our epic can be explained with science and the ones that cannot, even those stand on the very precipice of what can be easily passed as precursor to science as logic. As far as the misogynist aspect of come creations are concerned then societal changes and patriarchal monarchy to is to be taken in consideration. The bottom line is, these are our Epics, our history and we add a meaning different to what is conveyed in the text. This leads to major interpolations and the end product is more complex and some times deviates from its core narrative.

For example, Jaya a small story of family feud turned into the gigantic and humongous narrative of Mahabharata. Geet Govinda that aimed at teaching moral senses to people transformed into the story of Mahavishnu's avataran on earth. Religion, especially Hinduism or rather Sanatan Dharma is subjected to anthropological and historical progression. It might make people see red but that is the truth. Sanatan Dharma is the big daddy if I may, Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, Ajeevika, Sikhism are all but small stream of what is a mighty river flowing since time immemorial. So if we really need to open ourselves to the vastness that is our religion, we need to begin at its humble origin. for we are the stories we hear and tell.

but puranas are truly confusing. as someone who adores shiva i was hurt reading some being so dismissive towards him.

Shiva is a minor Vedic God that rose to prominent position during the Pauranic times. (Speaking historically) But the Shakth matha has a different story to it. He is void and fulfillment both. So dismissing him or not really makes not sense because he is there. So don't be hurt that way.

i wish i could read more about Shakti. She is just... supreme.

and you said it girl. we so think alike. i do believe puranas took inspiration from historical figures. epics did happen.
avatars were born. but they were humans with super human aura.

I strictly believe that even our Epics, our Gods and Goddess are open to scrutiny. there is a very famous line in Ram Charita Manas: "Jaaki rahi bhaavana jaisi, Prabhu murat milli taahin vaisi." It simply means that your God will take the form that you wish to see. Purans and the Vedas both I believe took inspirations from that current societal status. For example live-in relationships and pre-marital sex is not viewed as scandalous, people are accepting of the same. With rise of empires and religion that was foreign to us things began changing and the text were changed as well. From what I have read, Akbar had got Mahabharata translated in Persian as Razmnama, it has done away with many of the eyebrow raising stuff. So yes, Puranas and Vedas are subjected to change at the hands of the historical figures.

As far as avatars are concerned then you can take them as Gods on earth or as mortal men who achieved the legendary status. I believe that is a secondary notion, the prime concern should be the teachings of these great men. Ram teaches us duty is important and even if that duty asks for suffering and pain, you must not shy away from the same. Krishna teaches us that we must fight for what is right, even if that means sacrificing the very thing that is the reason for your existence. So take them what you want to, it is not the men we need to know but their journey that holds importance.

hence ordered books on our history too. right now on puranic era. then have to read epics. then bhagavatgita. got 'understanding shiva' too giving scientific explanation for 'shiva'.
then i will dive into history. (psst. didn't touch certain devdutt P as you said.)
i am truly obsessed. and you should be really scared because i shall be pestering you with my doubts, confusions and theories.😆.

Don't touch that P person even if you're held at gun point. If you really want to read then read analysis of Indrajit Bandhopadyay, Neeke Chaturvedi, Shonalika Kaul, Mihir Bhuta and V. Shantaram. Pester me for I'd pester others and both of us will know and grow more.

you really are a rockstar sweetheart.

So are you jaanemann.

thank you so much once again.
and i love you.❤️

❤️ Will Pm you soon!
Love you too!😳