Sita is Sri Kamakshi Amman..

[Viraja]

Namaste,

Sri Adi Shankara in his 'Kamakshi Stotram' calls Kamakshi as क्षोणी_भृत्_तनयेति Kssonnii_Bhrt_Tanayeti meaning 'the "Earth Born Daughter" (Devi Sita) and Who is the Voice behind the Shrutis (Upanishads)'.

If Sita is Kamakshi Amman, Sri Rama then should really be the amsa of 'Kameshwara' -- a form of Shiva, is it not? (For Kamakshi's husband is Kameshwara).

Has any work been done in this regard, that is, to find if there is any link between Sri Ram and Shiva?

It might interest some to know that one Mr. PVR Narasimha Rao, astrologer and spiritualist writes in his Yahoo group 'Vedic-wisdom' that Sri Rama is Vishnu tattwa + Shiva tattwa (and that Sri Krishna is Vishnu tattwa + Uma tattwa). Pl. see the posting http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/vedic-wisdom/conversations/messages/9305.

What do members feel about this? Any more insights can be provided regarding this?

Thank you.

[Anirudh]

Namaste Viraja,


If Sita is Kamakshi Amman, Sri Rama then should really be the amsa of 'Kameshwara' -- a form of Shiva, is it not? (For Kamakshi's husband is Kameshwara).

:Roll:

guess this posting should go to Shaiva forum
:headscratch:

Is there any special reason to convert Shree Raama into a Shaivite deity?
:sleeping: :coffee:

PS : If it were not my first post in 2014, I would have sued you 50 billion euro's like Paresh Rawal of OMG (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OMG_%E2%80%93_Oh_My_God!)

:crazy:

[Sudas Paijavana]

Namaste Viraja,

:Roll:

guess this posting should go to Shaiva forum
:headscratch:

Is there any special reason to convert Shree Raama into a Shaivite deity?
:sleeping: :coffee:

PS : If it were not my first post in 2014, I would have sued you 50 billion euro's like Paresh Rawal of OMG (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OMG_%E2%80%93_Oh_My_God!)

:crazy:

Namaste, Anirudh:

I do not think that Viraja is misappropriating Shri Ramachandra into a Shaivite deity, even though I agree that this thread should be in a different forum, not necessarily in the Shaiva section but perhaps in the God In Hindu Dharma section.

[Anirudh]

Namaste Sudas,

I am not ridiculing her in any way but found it funny to see Shree Raamachandra Prabhu as Shiva. My opinion is lets not not do things just to do things.

I have seen many a times that these kind of discussion create unwanted heated exchanges. Have made comments on the topic and not on the person behind.

[Amrut]

Namaste,

Sri Adi Shankara in his 'Kamakshi Stotram' calls Kamakshi as क्षोणी_भृत्_तनयेति Kssonnii_Bhrt_Tanayeti meaning 'the "Earth Born Daughter" (Devi Sita) and Who is the Voice behind the Shrutis (Upanishads)'.

If Sita is Kamakshi Amman, Sri Rama then should really be the amsa of 'Kameshwara' -- a form of Shiva, is it not? (For Kamakshi's husband is Kameshwara).

Has any work been done in this regard, that is, to find if there is any link between Sri Ram and Shiva?

It might interest some to know that one Mr. PVR Narasimha Rao, astrologer and spiritualist writes in his Yahoo group 'Vedic-wisdom' that Sri Rama is Vishnu tattwa + Shiva tattwa (and that Sri Krishna is Vishnu tattwa + Uma tattwa). Pl. see the posting http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/vedic-wisdom/conversations/messages/9305.

What do members feel about this? Any more insights can be provided regarding this?

Thank you.

Namaste,

Advaita always says all Gods are equal. So equating Devi Kamakshi with Sita devi and Sarasvati devi and other Gods simply indicates non-difference.

In this stotra, Devi Kamakshi is portrayed as the supreme godhead

Aum

[Viraja]

Namaste Anirudh ji,

This type of thinking (of analyzing Shri Ram to be a mix of Vishnu and Shiva tattwas) is not really new.

i) Some people have opined that Sri Rama and Sri Krishna being poornavataras, must have been present even before their manifestation on this earth, and not really just as Sri Vishnu, but present in their own unique identity.

ii) If you analyze the name of Sri Rama, you can find that it is called the Thaaraka mantra and is a combination of Namasivaya mantra and the Om Namo Narayanaya maha mantra thereby representing the merger of Shiva and Narayana.

@Amrut bhai,

Just because Sri Shankara might be equating the status of Kamakshi with Sita or otherwise, it does not mean that all gods are the same. They might be equals, but not the 'same'. For example, in Kanakadhara stotram that Adi Shankara sings towards ma Lakshmi, he does not call her as 'Kamakshi'. Even in Sitashtottaram (not composed by Adi Shankara), Srimati Sita Devi is called as 'Visalakshi', which is another name for 'Kamakshi'. In Mahapashupatastra.blogspot.com, the author says Srimathi Sita Devi is essentially 'Lalitha Tripura Sundari' who is the same as Kamakshi. Thus arises the doubt that given only Sita devi is Kamakshi, what is the connection between Sri Rama and Sri Shiva.

[Amrut]

Namaste Anirudh ji,

This type of thinking (of analyzing Shri Ram to be a mix of Vishnu and Shiva tattwas) is not really new.

i) Some people have opined that Sri Rama and Sri Krishna being poornavataras, must have been present even before their manifestation on this earth, and not really just as Sri Vishnu, but present in their own unique identity.

ii) If you analyze the name of Sri Rama, you can find that it is called the Thaaraka mantra and is a combination of Namasivaya mantra and the Om Namo Narayanaya maha mantra thereby representing the merger of Shiva and Narayana.

@Amrut bhai,

Just because Sri Shankara might be equating the status of Kamakshi with Sita or otherwise, it does not mean that all gods are the same. They might be equals, but not the 'same'. For example, in Kanakadhara stotram that Adi Shankara sings towards ma Lakshmi, he does not call her as 'Kamakshi'. Even in Sitashtottaram (not composed by Adi Shankara), Srimati Sita Devi is called as 'Visalakshi', which is another name for 'Kamakshi'. In Mahapashupatastra.blogspot.com, the author says Srimathi Sita Devi is essentially 'Lalitha Tripura Sundari' who is the same as Kamakshi. Thus arises the doubt that given only Sita devi is Kamakshi, what is the connection between Sri Rama and Sri Shiva.

Namaste Viraja di,

As I know, the tAraka mantra is OM and not RAma nAma or RAma mantra or any other combination. Author of Mahapashupatastra.blogspot.com also says the same, but my opinion of the independent of his, yet both are saying the same.

As I understand, all Gods are same. Maa Sita and Maa Parvati are two names of same omnipresent entity. To me both Sri RAma and Sri Siva are same entities appearing as different. Technically there is no difference between them.

One may worship another at one instance and vice versa. It is just to create faith and devotion in the devotees, nothing more.

KanadhAra stotram says




गीर्देवतेति गरुडध्वजसुन्दरीति

शाकम्भरीति शशिशेखरवल्लभेति ।

सृष्टिस्थितिप्रलयकेलिषु संस्थितायै

तस्यै नमस्त्रिभुवनैकगुरोस्तरुण्यै ॥ १०॥




We offer obeisance to the Goddess Mahalakshmi, the consort of Narayana, the preceptor of all the three worlds. She is variously known as Saraswati the Goddess of Learning, as Goddess Lakshmi, the Divine consort of Mahavishnu, as Shakambhari or as Parvati the consort of Lord Maheshwara. Verily it is she who is playfully engaged in creation, protaction and final destruction of the Universe || 10 ||

There is no distinction between the three.

Jai Shri Rama

[Viraja]

Namaste Amrut bhai,

My understanding is that though Sri Shiva and Sri Vishnu are equals, they are not exactly the 'same'. This is spoken in the sense, there exist in the cosmos, 2 unique identities of deities, one as Sri Shiva and another as Sri Vishnu. The scope of this thread is essentially intended to those having similar faith, and who know further about Sri Rama tattwa to explore this tattwa further.

It has been understood by scholars that similar to considering Sri Vishnu one with Sri Shiva, similarly Parvathi devi is considered one with Sri Lakshmi. However, it is to be noted that Sri Lakshmi (and ma Parvathi) are not necessarily 'Shakti' aka Kamakshi (Lalitha). (That Parvathi is different from SHAKTI and that Kamakshi amman is this Shakti are things that were given to me as understanding, in a few spiritual experiences I have been blessed with.)

Also, for god worshiped in Saguna swaroopa, Rama nama is the Taraka mantra, whereas for god worshiped in Nirguna swaroopa, OM is the Taraka mantra:

"Rama Nama gets exactly the same importance in Saguna Upasana (worshipping the Absolute Truth as a Being with a form) as does the Pranava ('Om') Mantra in Nirguna Upasana (worshipping the Absolute Truth as formless)." (From: http://www.namadwaar.org/articles/gloryoframanama.html).

This thread is not for discussing the Taraka mantra though, even if not considering Rama nama as Taraka mantra, it is known that 'Rama' is a combination of Narayana nama and Shiva nama, as stated already.

[ShivaFan]

Namaste

Here is something (which I have always have understood) which may be of interest and pertinent to the "Earth Born" Devi (and consort of Rama, etc.).

In my teaching, Vishnu has more than one consort.

This is includes Sri Devi, and also Bhu Devi. These are two manifestations of the Shakti associated with Vishnu. Shree is Lakshmi, and Bhu is relation to Bhumi. They are not exactly the same, two different manifestations, much like Parvati and Annapurna are two different manifestations of Shakti associated with Shiva.

So here we see two (almost identical) of Sri Devi and Bhu Devi from 1000 AD:

http://www.speakingtree.in/files/rsz/fit_s_438x328/files/01-2014/194115/6271d41a0b17f3416f53800db24393ac_1388828351.jpg

Bhu Devi is the "Earth Born" Devi (on the right). Of course, Sita is also the "Earth Born" Devi. Sita was the consort of Ram.

Therefore, what I am saying is Sita was NOT Lakshmi but in a sense a manifestation of but different. Sita was a Bhu Devi, She was a emanation (slightly different from manifestation) of Bhu Devi, Bhu Devi was a Daughter of Bhumi Mother Earth and a consort of Vishnu, Bhu is a manifestation of Vishnu's Shakti. This may explain what was being said in the verse. Kamakshi *(Jai!) is indeed a manifestation of Bhu Devi.

Om Namah Sivaya

[Viraja]

Thank you for the insight, ShivaFan ji.

Although most people do not know the distinction between the devis/amsas of Parvathi and Shakti, there does exist such a distinction. Their forms are different, their yantras and the means of propitiating them are different. One does not end up propitiating goddess Matangi, for instance, by having a picture of 'Kamalathmika' and reciting mantras for Kamalatmika. Mostly, these devis all emanated from the 10 different amsas 'Sati' the 1st wife of Shiva took. These are also classified as 'Dasamahavidyas' and Shri Lalitha is also one of them, known as 'Shodasi mahavidya'.

Sri Adi Shankara, as already stated in OP, calls Kamakshi as 'Sita' in Sri Kamakshi Stotram -> this is a very, very important reference because no Acharya in his invokation of a Shaiva deity, calls her as a Vaishnava deity, Sri Adi Shankara definitely conveys the message clear enough in calling Kamakshi as Sita as such in this sloka. In Lalitha Sahasranama, he calls Sri Lalitha as 'Kamakshi' (* 62 * Kamakshi - She who fulfills desires by her sight), so we know Lalitha Tripura Sundari Devi, is Kamakshi who is also Sita. In Lalitha Sahasranama, Sri Lalitha Devi is also called as Mahalakshmi (* 210 * Maha lakshmi - "She who takes the form of Mahalaksmi, the goddess of wealth"), but this I think is because Sri Kamakshi (aka Lalitha) is a combination of Sri Lakshmi and Sri Saraswati and Sri Durga (Parvathi). Hence in another instance, Sri Lalitha is called as 'Parvathi' in Lalitha Sahasranama.

When we see the similarities, we find that Sri Lalitha is born of fire, and Sita is born to Bhooma who has formerly given birth to Agni. I believe that owing to Agni-tattwa of Sri Lalitha, Sita is born 'Ayonija' to Bhooma.

What I see as the 'difference' in Lakshmi being called 'Parvathi' vs. Kamakshi being called 'Sita' is that Lakshmi existed all along, she could have been manifestation of Parvathi but she held on to her existence from times immemorial. Whereas Sita came into existence during Treta yuga, as daughter of Janaka. This suggests to me that she is very much the 'poornavatara' of goddess Tripura Sundari Devi (Kamakshi).

Besides this, the author Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula has done some research work into why Kamakshi Amman is Sita in his work at 'http://mahapashupatastra.blogspot.com/2011/08/sita-rama-tatwam-replica-of-shiva.html'.

To me, this research is of high importance, because instead of looking at Ma Lalithambika as some Shakta deity unrelated to Vaishnavam in any way, now I see her as ma Sita, and my Sadhana then should include paying respects to Tripura Sundari Devi, the Kamakshi.

I would like to end the note that I would appreciate any insight provided from stotras or otherwise that supports the above view.

http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/ DEU+h+JKSMtp8Dr6s9fjmluUTP4QPvbgRMjArLW4EQae/wBkMz7PdhAWRvBliSBe35iDUSy5lEg2i11MDU8AMlXPlGSEhyUUyFoQpySbSCtQSCcknifgYebOSze8lEO4OKDW77qshcEqI048U xZaeyOPgsVpSqGkacwvIu2Qiw14RfNZuKlKPTJQNySpyamnCiXlwbFxXUjy+F4OVKSiAJbbqvtNuvAL9GtLDSAnkCod5Xna/WM6BUqG5XZusVKrSTK0Ds8iiYfQ2Qge+4kE6hSsgD4GFr8/N1J12oVSc2bdn6Y6TSUBQvNfiA3moOmP4vhq4pKRrG9pJrPuw4Km95YRBCLEdP1bad6EqUkWNsJdqS2PzozaVIU0Zf2kwm4ycBOu ndt8/e0fuU+iNzJkNla6in1AuH+AUveIUscQUKupPO9rfDSFhqyZrayiz8zMPuH0e447VJPvU6XWL90q1BSO8FnLiU6jkP6UnUKXtIw/s2qvrO47OlwEuM8nE+01J0N+aLRbsx9mkW97UPHNYlsmK2sHPptHFGNK7e/O0uqU9MpU5dGak5d10faT1Hjyv8YQy0uZepJSDdBSopJ5jE/OLVtRUKRNyVOqrdapj9Wp6kLc7FMIJeb/AM1KU5EkWyNugMD1pMq6/LzLKm7LQXA5lYFKk2B/O6YS1MX8ZxaPtdfwNvVfJ4o6kMnaLEEdCL+G0clSZKnTE20FshuxOIyWASR0HPiIXb5v7Qiy0xlUt2JpxTRXv1qshwK0IT0PgYql vEecUsK2tFpD+TNMwWLWEAEbbi6fvD2Utp/p0ftFk2bumlTK5dKVTaW1loKNhf8A8BCRCkNSZfU0hwtSbRSF3tclI5EcjD3Zt1pbssrBtslveYgm11XHPxSPOCySjssO6x5ZrEM onsq5KskYS9zeN9aAmkbNjYfZcVhTgcLpILFs90XDvMvw/O/DnDvbdqhKqUg3LofNS9HuiRRIKCTfH2NjyINyk8NI27OUeg9uqFHnKXKzcxLjfyu/ZQVqZVrgCeSVlQ/5Qs9GVCUlX5Oo0Skt1OdcKaS4C1drngn+hPu/kOkaIOD4hhOr3kikgVbiSRivbZ92/hnmnUj2I0lDSXkKedYW60FFwnAcRxJxVjdevEq8IXbKt0X1qkS8Zw1Ts7xb7Wb5DM7ojX+V7o+za+ogVdPSztXSKeoPSzfo11L9A l7iXecN9BbuYL7xVy7gvxMakUyqmnOUmToVLTtCwsOKeQWbssH3ANfApA5JA6iBMjucjr37EGJhhDnPNriwttvt4hF0VvZT0ttWm mk7/s7gbytuwjD2m68Mvla2kDNFStiqeuZSlLwYxRY3ujkT5JhxtBTKPK0eQl0UORkKvUSlhIZZQVsXFnVJI5BOQvfmIDrLctLpl5RCA W22ChLeXJCbi9v6R5xT0nKC9gudd+Q980SFn/K5ve1eXUnoq1Th/HsX+1FW/MxcKc4h9ck8llDRLq0kIJINgnqT1MVXdn8MLpZA9wPD1Kc/DFK+k7eGTWCPJNlT61yhli00AW0tlYByKUkEc7chyg9uYMsJFYF07gBSb+8MlXEJQNYbuSzzzEoWUZAMgEgjjcxzCQH3K7+Joezo m9g2xxXy355qyOsOVJqRnaXPNy9UlCVMvOE+0T9k+HXjbXrBzk5Q61MS7u2dOfp9QlLJQ8t11DF73uhxJCRci+uunE2ioSrU/LEhLBU2TdTalCx8eOh8Ysias6uSU1NygUnA578ZJI8bXv8AKLMVS6myacTfyLj9hIoqgVMYbMwgjhbkd3Aoeo+sLm3DCJTaBr0e4 hS26gEMK3LFwVovj718QOuh6w5cm9mqTU5ipUGVfqlZeuhwyrzjoUVclquUJGg+FtBpFdMrsqtYmXJGXDqRbdpdGCvG17fKD2KsJ WRDchTsUWOHZ0HH9rfvFl+lDh+lhGzYPfVddlTDMOxW2ZehJ5LY23ONTs1W6/My655xnFlltXdlk34D5XPx1N4ryZszVQKiSRg4ATxPcVqYxnU1GbUorlXQkm5AQTc9SeZjXIyk00/m7LupSELuSggDuGKTnAhz3uu4jlwCpzVcs9RGxjSGgjZbUfIf6ULJ1Bcq0lCWWl4qK0qXlcEgA8DbkOML8B0jZaPcRFNemMijY5z mixdr4rIIiYax3H1cov3TJfoJ+keK2foSVJCqXIAq0SCynX4Qx+Wv7wWe/ssXcPRcXlJdLz6ULSq1lGyOJsCbDygtlkshxTVOn8lNqQMuAuCPs+MdcTQaC4O7TJBQ46MpMa36DRW2itqhybxBAwQyi51seNhEG jX7x1S2u0wanJjnMFrEWBvzXG+wzfDskwP7Z+kFraLjLCH5OdC2kYEoTodSenjHTBTafv8AdnZFvD+Yltkjl1UD18oZ+rtD+6ZH9 BP0gr6KR4+ojqk1II6N/aQPcDq1D9ri85LpZWgJS4kKQFYue8OOh8o04x24bO0PW1JktP8AYT9Inq7RfumS/QT9ID8tf3gtPF8RMawNc0k78s1xHGJhHb/Vyi/dMl+gn6RPVyi/dMl+gn6RPlr+8F3/AGSLuHomkAVmmsVSSWy8yw4sJVui8jIIWQQD8+WsHwsmaYBm5LFQXlmhAVYX4nzMOVkEtZ2WaQ0+HGaUXH8g4tNOCQq9iLjPXUAn XWwjR6pEMGXSKOWc8wldMvrwufaamxtcwammTid2uw7ih7PekC3xH7R4unTwUMLKxCsTvSOPK1/n4xFEMrZVSHUOywpCFjFWaqdkoOAk5g59bWBva0YJ2TLjT/aGqRvXD3FIkSAgc/8AHe5HkeukHLp83vAQlRSFk27Qq9r9b9IyMnOpy7q1XAF98QTpa/vdAPPwiKIdvZpDjrrs8xSnVuJsFNSakG9gLklZ5C3lFiQlKRZOgJJ/M6wjNOmlqAXvAlVgpQeVpY8ff6dNYZycmWFZOOqcVawJUrQfAkxFEXEiRIii/9k=

[Viraja]

Just to emphasize what the author at Mahapashupatastra.blogspot.com has cited as reference from 'Rama Rahasya Upanishad' to show Srimathi Sita Devi to be none other than Sri Lalitha Tripura Sundari (Kamakshi):


The next verse speaks about Sita Devi as follows.

"raamaabhiraamaa.n saundaryasiimaa.n somaavata.nsikaam.h
paashaa~NkushadhanurbaaNadharaa.n dhyaayettrilochanaam.h " (Rama Rahasya Upanishad Ch 2, Verse 33)
"I worship the three eyed one, Who is Abhirama, the pinnacle of beauty,
Who wears the crescent as ear ring, And who holds the noose, the goad, the bow and the arrow".

...Sita is called as the one holding noose (pasha), Goad (Ankusha), bow (Dhanush), Arrow (Baanam). What can be a greater proof of Sita being equated with Lalita better than this verse?.

[Anirudh]

Namaste Viraja,



This type of thinking (of analyzing Shri Ram to be a mix of Vishnu and Shiva tattwas) is not really new. you

i) Some people have opined that Sri Rama and Sri Krishna being poornavataras, must have been present even before their manifestation on this earth, and not really just as Sri Vishnu, but present in their own unique identity.

ii) If you analyze the name of Sri Rama, you can find that it is called the Thaaraka mantra and is a combination of Namasivaya mantra and the Om Namo Narayanaya maha mantra thereby representing the merger of Shiva and Narayana.


As you are making few points here, could you share the links for the same so as to understand it clearly.

[Viraja]

Namaste Anirudh,

I came across point #1 while I was researching on Rama nama somewhere. I cannot find the reference now, but will provide it once I have come upon it.

Point #2 regarding Rama nama can be found anywhere. For example, in this reference (http://orissa.gov.in/e-magazine/Orissareview/2011/may/engpdf/58-62.pdf), look for the paragraph that says, "Since it is a combination of the two important mantras-Panchakshar and Astakshar, ’Ra’ is taken from ‘Oam’ Nama Narayanaya and MA from the ‘Om’ Nama Sivaya. In Rama Rahasya Upanishad it is explained when these letters are removed from these two mantras they not only lose their primary meaning, but give the opposite meaning. Therefore it is an admitted fact that Rama Mantra is very powerful."

[Viraja]

Namaste,

I have been having spiritual experiences, granted by Sri Rama since my 38th year. I know this will be cause for disbelief for many/all, and I do not insist on anyone believing it. However it has been revealed to me that Sri Sita devi is indeed Kamakshi Amman, and that is the reason why, when I first saw the work at Mahapashupatastra.blogspot.com where the author said the same thing, I jumped up with joy. Now I have what Adi Shankara addresses about Kamakshi calling her as Sita and Rama Rahasya Upanishad as references.

When anyone has a spiritual experience, they naturally have a tendency to explore/know all about it. And that is why I raised this topic now, because as stated above, I have 2 instances of proofs relating to the fact/idea that Srimathi Sita devi is Kamakshi (Lalitha).

I would like to urge that owing to this reason, I would welcome anyone having any further insight on this regard to post on this thread or write to me.

Thanks.

PS: I had, in the OP, cited the message written by one Mr. PVR Narasimha Rao, wherein he says Sri Rama is Shiva tattwa + Vishnu tattwa and Sri Krishna is Vishnu tattwa + Shakti tattwa. I found one more small reference for the fact about Sri Krishna:

From: http://www.shivashakti.com/tripura.htm


These five flowery arrows together with the bow are personified as six Krishnas or Kamadevas. V84 of ch xxiv of Tantrarajatantra states that Lalita assumed a male form as Krishna, and 'by enveloping all women enchanted the whole world'. Each of the six forms is like dawn, with six arms, holding flute, noose, goad, sugarcane bow, flowers, sour milk.

[Amrut]

Namaste,

I have been having spiritual experiences, granted by Sri Rama since my 38th year. I know this will be cause for disbelief for many/all, and I do not insist on anyone believing it. However it has been revealed to me that Sri Sita devi is indeed Kamakshi Amman, and that is the reason why, when I first saw the work at Mahapashupatastra.blogspot.com where the author said the same thing, I jumped up with joy. Now I have what Adi Shankara addresses about Kamakshi calling her as Sita and Rama Rahasya Upanishad as references.

When anyone has a spiritual experience, they naturally have a tendency to explore/know all about it. And that is why I raised this topic now, because as stated above, I have 2 instances of proofs relating to the fact/idea that Srimathi Sita devi is Kamakshi (Lalitha).



Namaste Viraja di,

Happy to hear that you are having spiritual experiences. Spiritual experiences are always real and true. We have to trust them. Sometimes we do not know what it actually means, hence exploration is natural. However, this experience happened when you didnt expect it to happen, there was no planning. In spirituality, there is no planning. No one knows what is going to happen next. Hence certain answers are also given in future. When? we do not know, but truth will be revealed as per Ishvara's wish in some way or the other.

Best is to be open and leave it to the Lord :)

Hari OM

[brahma jijnasa]

Namaste


This type of thinking (of analyzing Shri Ram to be a mix of Vishnu and Shiva tattwas) is not really new.

I would like to mention that we had on this issue a comprehensive discussion in another thread: post #193 and forward


i) Some people have opined that Sri Rama and Sri Krishna being poornavataras, must have been present even before their manifestation on this earth, and not really just as Sri Vishnu, but present in their own unique identity.
...
My understanding is that though Sri Shiva and Sri Vishnu are equals, they are not exactly the 'same'. This is spoken in the sense, there exist in the cosmos, 2 unique identities of deities, one as Sri Shiva and another as Sri Vishnu.

Vaishnava understanding is that all forms of Lord Vishnu (Vishnu tattva forms) are eternal forms of God who eternally reside in Vaikuntha.
According to Gaudiya vaishnavas there is one form of Lord Shiva called Sadasiva. He is also one of Vishnu tattva forms, and thus He is also eternal form of God Vishnu, ie He is identical to Lord Vishnu. We can even say He is Lord Vishnu Himself.
Note here that no distinction is made between Vishnu tattva (category of Lord Vishnu) and Shiva tattva (category of Lord Shiva, ie Sadasiva) since it is assumed that they are from the same Vishnu tattva category.
Also note that according to Gaudiya vaishnavas there is another Lord Shiva who is not Vishnu tattva, who is different from Lord Sadasiva. This Lord Shiva is guna avatara Lord Shiva. He is one of 3 guna avataras known as Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva. This guna avatara Lord Shiva is just a jiva soul and thus he is not the Supreme Lord.

Now, when we say "all forms of Lord Vishnu (Vishnu tattva forms) are eternal forms of God who eternally reside in Vaikuntha" by this we mean that these forms such as Narayana, Rama, Krishna, Sadasiva, Narasimha, Balarama, Sankarshana, ... etc, they all live eternally in Vaikuntha, and sometimes they descend from Vaikuntha to this material world as avataras. The word avatara literally means "one who descends".

It is also said that Brahman is only one, ie The Supreme entity (Brahman) is One who appears in many different personal forms. This Supreme Brahman manifested as God (the Lord) and His power (shakti) who is His eternal spouse (Goddess). Thus we have One Supreme Brahman manifested as various forms of divine couples Lakshmi Narayana, Sita Rama, Radha Krishna, Uma Sadasiva, ... etc. All these Gods and Goddesses are this single Supreme Brahman manifested in many forms. They are all Vishnu tattva category.
However there are other gods and goddesses who do not belong to this Vishnu tattva category. So they are not The Supreme entity (Brahman) but are jivas (jiva souls). In other thread (see my posts here: post #20 and forward) I explained that not all the gods and goddesses belong to the category of The Supreme entity (Supreme Lord or Supreme God) which is mentioned in the scriptures under the names Brahman, paramatma and Bhagavan.
In order to understand this concept, it is of fundamental importance to understand the difference between jivas (jiva souls, individual living beings or spiritual souls) and paramatma or Supersoul (Supreme soul, Supreme Self, the Self). Vaishnava conclusion is that the individual living entity (jiva) is eternally different from the Supreme Soul (paramatma) or The Supreme Lord who exists as Supreme God.


It has been understood by scholars that similar to considering Sri Vishnu one with Sri Shiva, similarly Parvathi devi is considered one with Sri Lakshmi. However, it is to be noted that Sri Lakshmi (and ma Parvathi) are not necessarily 'Shakti' aka Kamakshi (Lalitha).

Here is an excerpt from Brahma-vaivarta Purana (http://brahma-vaivarta-puranam.blogspot.com/2007/08/sri-brahma-vaivarta-purana-complete.html) which covers some of the points that I mentioned above:


105 “This is Sri Krsna, and this is, You, Radha. This is You, Radha and this is Sri Krsna Himself.” Neither the Vedas nor I can say this of You two. We cannot distinguish between You and say that one is different than the other. Who can say it?

106 O mother, above the material world is the spiritual world of Vaikuntha and Goloka. O mother, as the spiritual world is eternal, so You are also eternal.

The Supreme Brahman manifested as God (the Lord) and His power (shakti) who is His eternal spouse (Goddess).
Srimati Radharani or Radha (consort of Lord Krishna) is said to have the same status as Her Lord because it is said that Supreme Lord although essentially one being manifests itself as two, purusha and shakti -- male and female, the Lord (God) and His spouse (Goddess) who is His power (shakti). They manifest as eternal divine couple whose relationship is unbreakable and eternal, and they are always together.


58 Sri Radha is more dear to Me than life. Day and night She rests on My chest.

This verse illustrates Radha and Krishna are always together.

Now the following point about Radha and Krishna:


107 As the living beings in all material universes are part and parcel of Lord Krsna, so You are the powers and abilities that reside within all living beings.

108 All males are part and parcel of Lord Krsna and all females are part and parcel of You. Lord Krsna is the Supersoul present in the bodies of all conditioned souls. You are the resting place of Him.

Compare verse 107 with Bhagavad gita 15.7 where it is said every living being is a part of Lord Krishna, and Bhagavatam 1.3.28 where it is said all the gods mentioned are Lord Krishna's parts. (See these quotes in my post: post #62).

In fact everything that exists in the world, including all living beings, gods and goddesses is just the manifestations of the power or potency of Radha and Krishna. This is illustrated in the Pancharatra text called Sanatkumara-samhita (http://nitaaiveda.com/All_Scriptures_By_Acharyas/Pancharatra/Sanatkumara-samhita.htm) :


Texts 70 and 71
Please hear, O Narada, and I will tell you the meaning of these mantras. The material world is manifested by the Lord's maya potency and other external potencies. The spiritual world is manifested by the Lord's cit potency and other internal and everlasting spiritual potencies. The protector of these potencies is said to be the gopi Shri Radha, who is Lord Krishna's beloved.

Text 77 O Narada, please know that everything is Their potency (vibhutim - potency). Even if I had many hundreds of years, I could not describe all Their glories.

Verses 72-76:


Text 72 The transcendental goddess Shri Radha is the direct counterpart of Lord Shri Krishna. She is the central figure for all the goddesses of fortune. She is the pleasure-potency of Lord Krishna.

Text 73 The wise say that She is the pleasure potency of Lord Krishna. Durga and the other goddesses in the world of the three modes are a million-millionth part of one of Her expansions.

Text 74 She is directly Goddess Maha-Lakshmi and Lord Krishna is Lord Narayana. O best of sages, there is not the slightest difference between Them.

Text 75 O best of sages, what more can I say? Nothing can exist without Them. This universe made of spirit and matter together is Their potency.

Text 76 She is Durga and Lord Hari is Shiva. Lord Krishna is Indra and She is Shaci. She is Savitri and Lord Hari is Brahma. She is Dhumorna and Lord Hari is Yama.

Compare this with excerpt from Brahma-vaivarta Purana (http://brahma-vaivarta-puranam.blogspot.com/2007/08/part-xiii.html) about Sri Radha:


Obeisances to She who resides in Vaikuntha¡ Obeisances to She who appears as Maha'-Laksmi¡ Obeisances to She who becomes Sarasvati the goddess of learning!

Obeisances to She who is Goddess Laksmi the queen of all opulences¡ Obeisances to She who is Goddess Laksmi the beloved of Lord Narayana!
...

Obeisances to She who is Lord Visnu's potency
...

Obeisances to She who is Savitri the mother of the four Vedas¡ Obeisances to She who is Durga'-devi the destroyer of obstacles!

Obeisances to to She who is the goddess of material energy who in Satya-yuga gave all the demigods their powers!
...

Obeisances to She who appears as Goddess Nidra¡ Obeisances to She who is beyond the modes of material nature¡ Obeisances to She who is the daughter of Daksa¡ Obeisances to She who is Sati-devi!

Obeisances to She who is the daughter of the mountains¡ Obeisances to She who is Parvati¡ Obeisances to She who is very austere¡ Obeisances to She who is Goddess Uma!

Obeisances to She who fasted not eating even dry leaves¡ Obeisances to She who is Gauri the most beautiful of fair girls!

Obeisances to She who resides on Mount Kailasa¡ Obeisances to She who is the queen of all opulences¡ Obeisances to She who is Nidra-devi¡ Obeisances to She who is mercy and faith!
... ...

Obeisances to She who is the fire's power to burn¡ Obeisances to She who is the beauty in the full moon and the autumn lotus!


Thus Radha and Krishna are manifested as all living beings, gods and goddesses including Lakshmi, Durga, Shiva, Indra, Shaci, Savitri, Nidra, Sati, Uma, ..., who are all parts of Radha and Krishna. All these gods and goddesses are either jiva tattva (jiva souls) or Vishnu tattva.
Not all the gods and goddesses are Vishnu tattva! Not all the gods and goddesses are same! We can say that all the gods and goddesses who belong to the Vishnu tattva category have the same status of the Supreme Brahman or paramatma. Yes, we could say so. But even then it does not make sense to say that, for example, Radha is the same as Lakshmi implying that there is no difference between them. Radha is eternally Radha, and Lakshmi is eternally Lakshmi. Lakshmi is a part of Radha and not the reverse. Besides Lakshmi is always with Narayana and not with Krishna.

Another important point to be noted: All the gods and goddesses who are Vishnu tattva remain eternally the same and do not change their status and form or physical appearance. That is why they are called "eternal"! For example Radha is always and eternally Radha. She never ceases to be Radha to become some other being or entity.
However this is not so with gods and goddesses who are jivas (jiva tattva category or jiva souls). Those gods and goddesses who are jiva souls have a material body, living in this material world and have a position which they get on the basis of their merits or good deeds (pious karma). Their material body is temporary, ie their life is temporary and they will perish, this material world is temporary and will perish also, and their pious karma is temporary also. When their pious karma is exhausted, they cease to be gods and goddesses and leave from their post of duty. Thus someone who is a jiva soul sometimes becomes a man, sometimes a god or goddess, sometimes even a demonic creature or lower being, sometimes even an insignificant insect. All this according to his merits, according to his karma.

regards

[Viraja]

Thank you, BJ ji for your input.

I went through the links provided by you.

The scope of this current thread is towards understanding 'what constitutes the dasavataras'?

On one hand, we have Sri Vishnu, on the other Sri Shiva. The study on this thread presents yet another aspect or 3rd dimension to this mix, namely "Sati devi's 10 amsas".

To explain the above a bit further, it might be of interest for some to know that there is one recent view that Sri Vishnu's 10 avataras are a combination of Sri Vishnu tattwa with some other tattwa, mostly one of Sati' devi's 10 different avataras.

When I expressed the above to the author of mahapashupatastra.blogspot.com, he writes,


What you have cited about Dasavatara and Shaktis is found in few Tantra scriptures like Todali tantra and Munda Mala Tantra.

Here is the verse from mundamaala tantra,

kR^ishNastu kALikaa saakShaat rAma mUrtischa taariNii.
varaaho bhuvanaa proktaa nR^isimho mauraviishvarii..
kamalaa matsya rUpasyAt kUrmastu bhagaLaamukhii.
dhuumaavatii vaamanaH syaat chinnaa bR^igukulodbhavaH..
maatangii bhauddha itiyeShaa shoDashii kalkiruupiNii ..

At this moment I haven't done a detailed study in those areas hence I would point you to a reliable link where this topic has been discussed once upon a time. This discussion may throw more light on your query and hopefully might help you.
http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/ambaa-l/conversations/topics/6480

The link in the above quoted message gives this information:

The Dasa Avatara of Maha Vishnu has connection with the Dasa Maha Vidya of Devi as per Munda Mala Tantra :

Dasa Maha Vidya Coresponds to Avathara Chakra in our body

( Of Maha Vishnu )

Kaali �����������.. Krishna ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Anahatha

Tara �����������.. Rama, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Manipuraka

( Above )

Sundari �����������.. Kalki ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Sahasrara

( North East )

Bhuvaneshwari ��������.. Varaha ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Anahatha

(West )

Bhairavi �����������.. Nirushimha ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Moola adhara

( Below )

Chinnamastha ���������. Parasurama ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Agnya

(East )

Dhumavathi ���������� Vaamana ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Samadhi State

( South East )

Bhagalamukhi ���������. Kuurma ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Shankini

( South )

Mathangi �����������.. Bhudha ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Vishuddhi

( North West )

Kamalathmikka ��������� Mathsya ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Not Mentioned

( South West )


The Directions in Which these forms first appeared.

Jai Maha Vidya � Sathi Devi � who took these 10 forms.

I differ from the above in just 2 instances: according to my inference (just stemming from my thoughts), Sri Rama is Shiva combined with Vishnu and Sri Krishna is Vishnu combined with Lalitha Tripura Sundari.

So, you can see that I am really striving to go in this direction -> it appears to me that the 10 different avataras of Shakti devi are presiding deities of different chakras of the body and that Sri Vishnu in connection with each of these energies, manifests as either form of the dasavataras.

Lastly, I understand what you are saying w.r.t Smt Radha Rani -> That she is a combination of Lakshmi, Durga and Saraswathi amsas and this combination of all 3 amsas is what I am referring in this thread as 'Sita'. :)

[Viraja]

Well, at this point, one important question arises in my mind:

Are all the tantric texts, most importantly the ones quoted in this thread - TantraRajaTantra, Todali Tantra and Munda Mala Tantra shaivite in nature? In other words, do they represent the avataras of Sriman Narayana from Matsya, Kurma to Kalki as influenced by Shakti devi?

[Viraja]

Namaste,

It appears to me now that parabrahman Sriman Narayana is actually 'desireless' - the seed for 'avatara' is sown in him through 'mayashakti' who is the 10 amsas of Sati devi, resulting in the 10 different avataras of bhagwan.

In the avataras being influenced by Shakti devi's amsas, I see bhagwan Sriman Narayan as being the 'purusha' and mother Shakti devi as being the 'prakriti'.

-- alternate explanations welcome.

-- Mundamala Tantra, Todala Tantra and Tantraraja Tantra are Shakta Tantric scripts.

Jai Ram!

[Viraja]

Hello friends again,

In some temples, such as Triprayar Sri Rama temple, Sri Rama is essentially treated as Brahma, Vishnu and Maheshwara combined.

" The image of Rama (Triprayar Thevar) resembles the Chaturbhuja Vishnu form with four arms, bearing a conch(Panchajanya), a disc (Sudarsana), a bow (Kodanda) and a garland respectively. It is believed that the deity worshipped here possesses some of the aspects of Shiva too. It was after killing the asura, Khara that Sri Rama got both the Shaiva and Vaishnava aspects. Thus Triprayar Thevar is also called Khara Samhara Moorthy. It is also believed that the portrayal of Rama with a garland held in the image's hand is also suggestive of aspects of Bhrahma and hence the deity is said to be a manifestation of the Trimoorthis." (Ref: http://www.vaikhari.org/triprayar.html)


Thanks.

[smaranam]

Namaste VirajaJi

I remember reading this back then but deliberately held back any comments. However would like to say something


I differ from the above in just 2 instances: according to my inference (just stemming from my thoughts), Sri Rama is Shiva combined with Vishnu and Sri Krishna is Vishnu combined with Lalitha Tripura Sundari.
1. You are right about Rama = VishNu + Shiv, and again the 2 are same and different like dhUp-chaunv (sunshine-shade). On Shri RAma NavamI 2006 I was given the realization that
"I"/HE/THAT = Buddha/TapasvI Yogishwar -- Shiva -- RanganAth (RAm-in-RanganAth-pose which I did not notice at the time, and had no clue up until say 2013 that RanganAth is Rama's IshTa) -- ... one week ...-- VishNu (final)

However, this is only regarding His purusha-tattva aspect. Ultimately He is that NArAyaNa.

What the dasha(10)- mahAvidyA map above is showing is the role of YogamAyA in the avatAr's manifestation. So if tArA is the mahAvidyA associated with rAma that is also correct. Notice the Buddha darshan in what I wrote above. (Buddha-tArA) , and RAma is more tilted towards ascetism, was the target of VasishTha muni's YogVasishTha.

2. Shri KRshNa: You and they are both right. Shri KRshNa says in Bhagavd GitA He manifests on earth in association with His YogamAyA -- and Him being the pUrNAvatAr is speaking for all the above avatars. Also, He has clear-cut assignments for His YogamAyA - go and be born as YashodA's daughter. Them come here and do this that.

Shri LalitA TripurAsundarI is the ultimate all-encompassing Devi from Shri VidyA standpoint, but KAlI and LalitA are 2 sides of the same coin.
While KAli is the sauMhAra aspect of KRshNa (annhilation of evil - yadA yadA hi dharmasya, mahA-kAla, "kAlosmI" ) , Shri LalitA is the prem-leelA aspect.
Since He is pUrNa He choses YogmAyA in pUrNa form which is LalitA who transforms into KAli on the battlefield of Kurukshetra as well as Shalya , KauMsa, rAkshasa-uddhAr. UddhAr - because His compassion for the rAkshasAs including pUtnA is amazing and this is the motherly aspect of kAlI.
Shri KRshNa is first a Mother to His devotees (This is the motherly instinct of nArAyaNa, VishNu combined with motherly nature of KAli) He literally nurtures those who truly come to Him. Even the leelas with Gopis - He is actually nurturing them as ParamAtmA. Trust VishNu to do that -- in Rama and KRshNa avatar, you will find both male and female devotees putting their head in His lap. Lakshman, Bharat Shatrughna , Sita -- Shri RAma. Radha, gopis, Uddhav, Sudama -- Shri KRshNa. Numerous devotees of today also automatically put their head in His lap.


So, you can see that I am really striving to go in this direction -> it appears to me that the 10 different avataras of Shakti devi are presiding deities of different chakras of the body and that Sri Vishnu in connection with each of these energies, manifests as either form of the dasavataras.
Yes, this is correct and in accordance with what Shri KRshNa says in the Bhagavad GitA - -that He descends via His YogamAyA. There is no contradiction with the Shakti texts like Devi BhAgvatam in this case because they are simply looking at the same Divine Phenomenon from a different (perhaps topsy-turvey) perspective. "VishNu cannot manifest in the material world without the shakti which He calls YogamAyA" This shakti when acting on normal ordinary creation is MahAmAyA and causes ignorance and entanglement of jivas.



Lastly, I understand what you are saying w.r.t Smt Radha Rani -> That she is a combination of Lakshmi, Durga and Saraswathi amsas and this combination of all 3 amsas is what I am referring in this thread as 'Sita'. :)
You are right in saying that Sita is the combination of all Shakti tattvas because since Rama was ek-patnI-vratA His shakti-consort (SitA) had to have all Shiva-VishNu-BramhA shaktis combined, unlike KRshNa who could distribute 8 shaktis among 8 consorts. and their expansions.

Shri VidyA says Shri i.e. LalitA tripurAsundarI is the ultimate pUrNa Devi. However the emphasis of the Shri VidyA path is on mechanics of creation and manifestation (Shiva-Shakti), pinDanDa-bramhAnDa corelation etc.

Whereas, when GauDIya VaishNav say RAdhA is the fountainhead of all shakti spectrum, what they mean is :
If you filter out all the creation-annhilation aspects of the Shakti , and simply sift out the purest prem tattva untouched by material/creative-maintaining-punishing motives, where the objective is nothing but alhAd , to enhance the pleasure of the Ultimate PUrNa Purusha Shri KRshNa in a very selfless way, and Whose focus is none other than prem-lIlA with Shri KRshNa , ArAdhanA of Shri KRshNa (so much that He worships Her too), with no other distractions -- of other bhAvas or missions, motives,
--- what remains is RAdhA.
Hence from the perspective of the GV dheya (goal), which is KRshNa prema , RAdhA is the fountainhead of all shaktis. Even Lakshmi is sometimes seen bestowing material abundance on the world & auspiciousness and good qualities for good living, but RAdhA is only associated with shuddha bhakti. Hence the GV siddhAnta says that Radha is higher.

What higher means depends on who is asking/telling , from what angle. The same Devi transforms into shades and bhAvas depending on the moment and comes around full circle.


What bramhajijnasa says above about the various forms of NArAyaNa being eternal is also correct, and this is svAnubhav. However, my anubhav tells at least Shri KRshNa/NArAyaNa, RAma, NRsiMha, HayagrIva, VarAha, is the same One in those forms, not different Ones, although they have not all revealed pUrNatva like KRshNa/NArAyaNa has. (I will not say that about all the aMsha and shaktyAvesha avatArs who are empowered beings byVishNu rather than VishNu Himself)
Now you may say who is denying that and what's new about it -- but please tune in and hear the subtle implications of what I am saying --- all those forms -- although co-existing, are really my same PrabhU. They are not different Persons. As the various forms have changed shades of bhAva and purpose, so does LakshmI change shades of bhAva. Hence each is associated with a special form of Her.

P.S. Oh and regarding your most recent post -- Shri RAma as TrimUrti is also nothing alarming when we see what Shri KRshNa says in the Bhagavad GitA. Of cource the TrimUrtI is a transformation (guNa avatAr) of the Supreme Parameshwar, ParaBramhan' Who is Shri KRshNa or Shri RAma for devotees of RAma.
The tradition of Shri Gurudeva Datta (DattAtreya) is also meant to convey the same -- "the One I worship is the Ultimate Brahman' through this form and hence this form is a combination of TrimUrti" Technically, Datta (Atri's son given in dAna = Datta + Atreya ) is VishNu pure, and BramhA became Rshi Chandra, Shankar became Rshi DurvAsa. Yet, people worship Datta as the TrimUrti.
I like the ek-mukhI Datta at NArAyaNpur (One face, 6 arms - ayudhas (weapons/what they hold) are a symbolic blend of TrimUrti ayudhas). Now it is different that the bhAva here is quite different for those who want to see the difference.

[Viraja]

A beautiful and detailed reply from you as usual, Smaranam ji. Thank you for this wonderful clarification. I come to understand that Radha and her Shaiva equivalent Sri Lalitha Tripura Sundari devi are the prema or pure love aspect of shakti/female force. Very nice to know this. Thanks.