Perfect opposites

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté

It is said opposites attract. I think of śiva - perfect silence , perfect stillness. And what is the opposite?
na hi kaṣcit svasmin ātmani muhūrtam avatiṣṭhate
or, there is nothing that exists in its own form even for a moment (muhūrta or a moment , instant).


What can be more opposite of perfect rest , then perfect dynamism?
What is perfect dynamism? Śakti. This IMHO is the reason śiva + śakti are always seen in union. Perfect attraction.

http://images.exoticindiaart.com/buddha/a_fine_portrait_of_ardhanarishvara_shiva_shakti_tp13.jpg




praṇām

[srivijaya]

Perhaps also the indivisibility of both. Sakti's base is Shiva. Shiva permiates Sakti.

Namaste

[Eastern Mind]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté

It is said opposites attract. I think of śiva - perfect silence , perfect stillness. And what is the opposite?
na hi kaṣcit svasmin ātmani muhūrtam avatiṣṭhate
or, there is nothing that exists in its own form even for a moment (muhūrta or a moment , instant).


What can be more opposite of perfect rest , then perfect dynamism?
What is perfect dynamism? Śakti. This IMHO is the reason śiva + śakti are always seen in union. Perfect attraction.

http://images.exoticindiaart.com/buddha/a_fine_portrait_of_ardhanarishvara_shiva_shakti_tp13.jpg




praṇām

Beautiful picture. I have an Ardhinarisvara murthi at home, but have never seen this picture. Nice art. I personally have often failed to understand any need to separate. I know people do, and Shaktism is the result, but personally, it seems like hooking up a trailer to your truck, when there is already plenty of space in the truck.

Please, not wishing to start any argument, just stating how I feel.

Aum Namasivaya

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté EM & srivijaya


Beautiful picture. I have an Ardhinarisvara murthi at home, but have never seen this picture. Nice art. I personally have often failed to understand any need to separate. I know people do, and Shaktism is the result, but personally, it seems like hooking up a trailer to your truck, when there is already plenty of space in the truck.

Please, not wishing to start any argument, just stating how I feel.

Aum Namasivaya

Yes, I see your point re: trailer and space. Srivijaya alludes to this indivisibility of this Being.

I think at times it i.e. 2, causes some confusion. Yet one must consider why the wise chose to discuss 2 vs. 1. IMHO to better explain the full qualities of the Divine.

What I find intriguing is the full depth and breath that the Divine is able to encompass - that was my notion of being perfect in both silence and activity. We too as extensions of this Being can experience both the dynamism of activity and the perfect rest of the Silence within. Some call it the balanced state.

praṇām

[DavidC]

'Opposites attract' is probably not an ancient wisdom saying, and neither is 'like attracts like.' At least they do not seem to explain everything like any ancient wisdom saying. Shakti and Shiva are also divine and thus alike.

I guess it is an interesting topic and nice picture though.

[Eastern Mind]

IMHO to better explain the full qualities of the Divine.



Yes, this is indeed how I see it, and just as Vinayaka's goad and noose help us to remember his powers.

But of course, I've had this discussion with Tamil friends. Some view it just as you and I do. Others, however, see 2. So then this creates a bit of confusion. They stand at the lingam thinking 1, 1, 1, and then move over to Rajarajeshwari, and see 2. So then when you say, "Which is it?" you finally get, "I"m not sure." which is IMHO, demonstrative of confusion.

For similar reasons, I prefer Murugan standing alone, without his two 'consorts'.

Aum Namasivaya

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté EM

Yes, this is indeed how I see it, and just as Vinayaka's goad and noose help us to remember his powers.

But of course, I've had this discussion with Tamil friends. Some view it just as you and I do. Others, however, see 2. So then this creates a bit of confusion. They stand at the lingam thinking 1, 1, 1, and then move over to Rajarajeshwari, and see 2. So then when you say, "Which is it?" you finally get, "I"m not sure." which is IMHO, demonstrative of confusion.

For similar reasons, I prefer Murugan standing alone, without his two 'consorts'. Aum Namasivaya

There is always a pickle :) ! It 'seems' there may some that think people cannot think of the One with multiple (seemingly opposing) qualities. And the quality of perfect rest and perfect dynamism simultaneously may give one a brain cramp.

That is why I am so attracted to this verse na hi kaṣcit svasmin ātmani muhūrtam avatiṣṭhate or, there is nothing that exists in its own form even for a moment (muhūrta or a moment , instant). That is the dynamism of śakti.
Yet from this śakti it naturally brings us to prakṛti. The beauty of prakṛti is in its components: pra + kṛti ( that ties us back to this dynamism concept).

pra प्र - is excessively , very , much ~ incessantly ~
kṛti कृति is the act of doing , making , performing , manufacturing , composing


So pra + kṛti is incessantly acting, doing. Atoms, particles constantly vibrating; Solar systems and galaxies turning, exploding, created and destroyed. And this is all done within the hands and foundation of sattā सत्ता - Being, existence, that perfect silence.

praṇām

[Hiwaunis]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté

It is said opposites attract. I think of śiva - perfect silence , perfect stillness. And what is the opposite?
na hi kaṣcit svasmin ātmani muhūrtam avatiṣṭhate
or, there is nothing that exists in its own form even for a moment (muhūrta or a moment , instant).


What can be more opposite of perfect rest , then perfect dynamism?
What is perfect dynamism? Śakti. This IMHO is the reason śiva + śakti are always seen in union. Perfect attraction.

http://images.exoticindiaart.com/buddha/a_fine_portrait_of_ardhanarishvara_shiva_shakti_tp13.jpg




praṇām

Pranam,
I too love the picture. When I chant Om Namah Shivaya, I see myself as praying to both and or One, Shiv/ Shivay. I even see Shiv, Vishnu and Ganapati as Gayatri. I am not sure why because I haven't always thought that way.

When I think of perfect opposites (perfect rest , then perfect dynamism) this is what comes to my mind: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTmHf5cjMvA.

Namaste,

[Hiwaunis]

Pranam,
I too love the picture. When I chant Om Namah Shivaya, I see myself as praying to both and or One, Shiv/ Shivay. I even see Shiv, Vishnu and Ganapati as Gayatri. I am not sure why because I haven't always thought that way.

When I think of perfect opposites (perfect rest , then perfect dynamism) this is what comes to my mind: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTmHf5cjMvA.

Namaste,

After listening to that I could do nothing else but sit quietly.

[brahman]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté

It is said opposites attract. I think of śiva - perfect silence , perfect stillness. And what is the opposite?
na hi kaṣcit svasmin ātmani muhūrtam avatiṣṭhate
or, there is nothing that exists in its own form even for a moment (muhūrta or a moment , instant).


What can be more opposite of perfect rest , then perfect dynamism?
What is perfect dynamism? Śakti. This IMHO is the reason śiva + śakti are always seen in union. Perfect attraction.

http://images.exoticindiaart.com/buddha/a_fine_portrait_of_ardhanarishvara_shiva_shakti_tp13.jpg




praṇām






Class picture, appropriate for Embroidery.




Brahman unites Brahman, prakriti disintegrates Prakriti.....

after all, everything belongs to Brahman.






.

[Spiritualseeker]

Namaste all,


That is why I am so attracted to this verse na hi kaṣcit svasmin ātmani muhūrtam avatiṣṭhate or, there is nothing that exists in its own form even for a moment (muhūrta or a moment , instant). That is the dynamism of śakti.

Beautiful. Just a thought but couldn't one say that this shows that interdependence of the Buddhist was taught before in the Vedas? Because if i am understanding the verse correctly it seems like interdependence. Siva is Siva Shakti is Shakti they are one not two, there is no duality, they exist together as one. One is not without the other. Interdependence. Similar to yin and yang which these polar opposites are actually simultaneous and express life.

OM
-juan

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté juan,



Beautiful. Just a thought but couldn't one say that this shows that interdependence of the Buddhist was taught before in the Vedas? Because if i am understanding the verse correctly it seems like interdependence. Siva is Siva Shakti is Shakti they are one not two, there is no duality, they exist together as one. One is not without the other. Interdependence. Similar to yin and yang which these polar opposites are actually simultaneous and express life.

OM -juan

...they are one, not two. 'Two' would be like seperating wet from water, light from flame, heat from fire - it does not occur , yet it can be talked about ~as if~ two existed.

Now, there is still a key principle to consider - and of great import to many a sādhaka. This is from the Vijñāna Bhairava¹ :

… śaivī-mukhaṃ ichocyate || 20
śakti ( which is śaivī) is the mouth (mukhaṃ) or entrance ichocyate (it is explained , ucyate or explained)

This sūtra informs us śakti is the entrance…. but to what?

The 21st sūtra informs us completely.
yathālokena dīpasya kiraṇair-bhāskarasya ca|
jñāyate dig-vibhāgāadi tadvac chatyā śivaḥ priye || 21
Just as parts of space are known by the light of a lamp
or the rays of the sun, in the say way O' Dear One
Śiva is known through Śakti.

Hence this is where there is discernment - that this śakti within us is this ever-refreshed conciousness - bhairavī. Some call this uninterrupted awareness. It is an entrance point to śiva, that perfect silence of the Self.

praṇām
words and references

Vijñāna Bhairava - the conversation between śakti and śiva. This is from the Rudrayāmala Tantra.
Vijñāna is vi+jñāna: vi is to discern, distinction + jñāna is wisdom, knowledge.

[Spiritualseeker]

Namaste,

Beautiful beautiful. The wisdom reveals our highest potential. May we find this wonderful Sakti within to know the all pervading Parasiva.

[sunyata07]

Great post, Yajvan.

I find it intriguing that in our everyday human experience there are in fact two accepted age-old adages of the idea of unity or collaboration: 1) Opposites attract, as you have mentioned in your post, and then there's 2) Like attracts like. But which one is correct? Opposites can attract, as you see in magnetic forces. But then when you combine matter with antimatter you get an explosion. Like attracts like as you can see with gravitational forces; but if you look in chemistry and physics, like charges on atoms repel like charges.

I think the concept of Shiva/Shakti goes beyond opposite and like attraction. It is as you said like separating water from the wetness or the heat from the flame. Shiva and Shakti are like two sides of the same coin. We can see distinct faces on either side, but we are still holding the same coin in our hand.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6zV4f7t8024

OM Shanti

[rkpande]

Shiva and Shakti are like two sides of the same coin. We can see distinct faces on either side, but we are still holding the same coin in our hand.

Shanti
Then, if you reduce the thickness of the coin to zero, the coin vanishes.

[sunyata07]

Then, if you reduce the thickness of the coin to zero, the coin vanishes.

Excellent observation, rkpande.

Namaste.

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté

I wrote,



na hi kaṣcit svasmin ātmani muhūrtam avatiṣṭhate
or, there is nothing that exists in its own form even for a moment (muhūrta or a moment , instant).


I was thinking of this today and it made me think, what is form any way ? This is known as rūpa . And rūpeṇa is defined as 'in the form of'.
Now this rūpa or rūpam is rooted in (√) bhū and it is defined as 'to assume a form'. Some say it this way, 'having the form or appearance or color of'. We know this earth, this existence of the material level ( which is śakti as its essence) is called bhū and it is defined as becoming , being , existing , springing , arising - several good names for the manifested world.

Yet this world/cosmos is also called jágat and here is the beauty of these words. We have form = rūpa = bhū = jágat . So if we look at this jágat it is defined as:

the worlds
the world, this world
that which moves or is aliveIf we look at the word jágat it is made of ja+gat.

ja = born or descended from , produced or caused by , born or produced in or at or upon ; it also means speedy, swift
gat = is gata and is defined as to come from; it also means departed fromSo we begin to see a deeper meaning of this word jágat - it moves, it is alive, it is produced and it departs i.e. it comes and goes and it is swift, speedy. Hence it (jágat) comes and goes speedily.


So one asks what's the big deal ? It is the overall connection:

Form = rūpa = bhū = jágat =na hi kaṣcit svasmin ātmani muhūrtam avatiṣṭhate - or, there is nothing that exists in its own form even for a moment (muhūrta or a moment , instant), and we can call this creation/form/existence/loka or in short jágat that which is born and comes and goes speedily, it does not keep its same form even for a moment.

One last point - what is waking state of consciouness called ? Jāgrat . Overall jāgrat is rooted in this word jāgṛ defined as to watch over, to be attentive. . Yet it is interesing to note that this jā in jāgrat is = ja, found in jágat and has the same definition as above i.e. born or descended from , produced or caused by , born or produced in or at or upon ; it also means speedy, swift . The connection? in waking state our thoughts are born again and again , swiftly. We are ever anew in thought just as in the position of space we just occupied a millisecond ago.


praṇām

words

sleep also called suṣupti
dream also called svapna