Tag: tara

On right view,Buddhist-coloured deities and Hindu practice

abhinnah_apiLeave a comment

Ths is a novice’s attempt to answer about why the practice of some deities:tArA,chinnamastA(to a small extent vajrayoginI too),vilAsinI also is soiterologically relevant:

[Edit:Please do not take this as some word of shAstra or AchAryavAkya or something,I am not any guru,I am just thinking my thoughts out loud after asking my question and trying to process what I got]

An example of animus Buddhists displayed to Hindu systems can be seen about. This ritual consumption of brahmin flesh(a huge NO in any Hindu system that will ever exist) stems from two sources:(1)A kApAlika background is suggestible,as noted by the offering of brahmapuShpa to gain power as recorded by the author(I am not saying that that system existed in toto like that at Adi Shankara’s time but it transmits some relevant information about a cult with similar practices) and (2)actual dvesha for brAhmaNas,the gurus and systemizers of a lot of the native systems in the first place from where they took our mantras from:Hence these deities under the influence of the Bauddha transmitters took on Bauddha dresses in various aspects(like Rishi,etc)

With deities worshipped by such people,how is it that our people gain mukti?Taking leads from this article suggested by the author of the Kamakotimandali blog suggests that without a proper understanding of the tattvic scheme,such Bauddha upAsakas in the 36 tattva scheme would attain at best Buddhi tattva,mahAdevIing the chintAmaNI she is, granting the sAdhakas according to their view. Or worse,worldly siddhi mainly only more often.

Another thing is that in Hindu views,the deity with the same iconography is interpreted differently. An example is here where the image which is considered that of Arya achala is interpreted as that of krodharAja rudra trampling some demonic yakSha. Sometimes the descriptions in the Astika version are superficially different(sarvasiddhi and sarvabuddhi rather than sarvabuddhaDAkinI).

So the transmissions which have come back to Hindus with that Buddhist dress have in key,a different understanding than the Buddhists of what they are worshipping+when they got back the tranmissions from those who achieved only siddhi,their correct understanding put them on higher states of AdhyAtma than the Bauddhas they got it from.(albeit coloured by the ‘shunya’ type of language they inherited)[because they could understand the tattvas better and the devI granted them a place in those higher tattvas]. Another core difference is a practical respect in terms of ritual to brahmins(in the bhojana anga of the Hindu method of attaining siddhi in mantras).

Addendum by @TheRajarshi:

1. The necromancy practices are still prevalent even among H Kapalika-s (few are there still) but neither done in public nor publicized.
2. The actual consumption is mostly a tokenism in ritual setting to gain powers. 3. The mention of “brahmin” is because brahmins were the ones who had the tapa-shakti, other Vs did not. Same way even today in H viracara when taking a kapalapatra one cannot take random one…. else there is no Shakti in it, and becomes useless. Specific type of kapalas are useful. Guru decides basd on nature of sadhaka/na. Same logic baudhas were using. A kapala of a an individual who was a good yogi/sadhaka is highly prized. Or a chandala for certain rituals.
3.The icons of baudha deities trampling on H (IMO) was result of assimilation + abhicara practices which each group was doing on the other. But by time of Kalacakra tantra the Baudhas had come full circle and accepted H deities without any modification/distortion – post-Islam.
4. Coming to practical upasana Vajrayanists also produced terrific siddhas (not lower level at all if one knows how to judge the level of a siddhi) as did Hindus.

On IshvaralAbha and tyAga by bhairavadAsa GYAna bAbA,an upAsaka of tArA

abhinnah_apiLeave a comment

EIf2PC8U0AAEAd9

OM kAlAya namaH| OM kAlapUjitAya namaH| OM kAlAtItAya namaH|

I am translating Pratip Adhikari’s facebook post where he posts this excerept from that upAsaka and translating as well as I can,with the aid of Rahul da,who greatly improved my translation.

শাস্ত্রীয় নিয়মানুসার মেনে চলা সৎ সাধুই একমাত্র
ধর্মের প্রাণ রক্ষক। কোনো কিছু কে রক্ষা করতে হলে, ত্যাগের প্রয়োজন:-তার প্রকৃত প্রমান সহ প্রত্যক্ষ হল ভারতবর্ষ।

“আত্মবিদ্যায় ভারতের বিদ্যা, তাই ভারত ত্যাগী”
–––ভৈরবদাস জ্ঞানানন্দ বাবা।

ত্যাগ না জানিলে, নিজের উদ্দেশ্য পথের লক্ষে যাওয়া যায় না। সব কিছু কে আঁকড়ে ধরে, ঈশ্বর কে পাওয়া কিন্তু দুর্গমময় হয়ে ওঠে। যদি সত্যেকে প্রতিষ্ঠা করতে হয় তবে নিজের প্রাণ কালগ্নিতে ঘৃতাহুতি দিতে হবে। যেমন পুরাণে, মুনি-ঋষিরা ধর্ম কে প্রতিষ্ঠা করতে, নিজেদের বুক চিরে রক্ত বের করে আহুতি দিতেন। আমরা ভারতীয় সন্তান:- আমরাই সারা বিশ্বের কাছে আদর্শ। অন্য কোনো দেশ আমাদের কাছে আদর্শ হতে পারে না। আমার দেশ আমাকে খাওয়ায়ে, তাই আমার ওপর দেশ কে নিয়ে মাতা মাতির দরকার নেই। আমার দেশ আমাকে কিছু বিশেষ জিনিস উপহার দিয়েছেন, ঠিক সেই কারণেই তার ঋণ শোধ করা অসম্ভব। নিজের মায়ের ঋণ শোধ করা যেমন অসম্ভব, তেমনি দেশের ঋণ শোধ করাও অসম্ভব। ভারত জননী জন্মভূমি।
নিজের বৈশিষ্ঠতা রক্ষার জন্য নিজেকে শান্ত না করিলে, পরবর্তীতে নিজের উদ্দেশ্য পথের অজানার সন্ধান পাওয়া যাবে না। এই দেশ আমাকে প্রচুর দিয়েছে, সেই তুলনায় আমি কি দিলাম?????

আমি কোনো ধর্মের প্রতি আগ্রহ নই, কারণ বর্তমান যুগে ধর্ম কাকে বলে, কি হয়, এর উত্তর কেউই জানেন না। বই পড়লে সাল, মাস,তিথি, নক্ষত্রের স্থান বিচার করা গেলেও একজন বিশিষ্ঠ মানুষের নাম এবং চরিত্র মনে ধরলেও, নিজের উদ্দেশ্য সফল হইবে না। জগৎকে মাতিয়ে রাখে মানুষ, তাই তার স্থান সবার উচ্চে। পূর্বে প্রকৃতি সম্মন্ধে মানুষ যাহা বর্ণনা করিয়াছে, সেই ভাবধারা আজ রীতি মত নষ্ট এবং বিলুপ্ত হইয়াছে। সবাই নিজের মতন ভাবতে শুরু করেছে তাই, জন্মদাতা ও জন্মদাত্রীর উপর কাহারো বিশ্বাস নাই।
ভারতই একমাত্র আধ্যাত্মিকতার প্রাণকেন্দ্র। ভারত এমন এক মা যে তার সমস্ত ধর্মের সন্তানদের আপন করে নিলেও তারা তার মা কে আপন করতে পারেনি।
ইহাকে দুঃখ বলিবো না, সবকিছুই কালের হাতে, আমরা তো নিমিত্ত মাত্র।
তিনি ইতিহাস গড়েন, আমরা কর্ম করি। আমার মত অনুযায়ী, নিত্য জীবনের এক অংশ আমরা জন্ম হইতেই, তার পায়ে সমর্পণ করেছি, তাই অনেক সময়, তিনিও আমাদের জীবনের এক ভাগে অবস্থান করেন।
আবার যাহারা পুরো পুরিই সমর্পিত তাহাদের দেহ-মন জুড়ে শুধু তিনিই থাকেন।
ধর্মের উল্লেখ বহু পূর্বেই আছে, তাই সৎ সাধুরা সমস্ত ধর্ম কে ধারণ করে, আত্মভোলা ভালোবাসায় ও নিত্য লীলার মধ্যেই মগ্ন হয়ে।

শুভমস্তু
জয় তারা।

The pious and pietistic who adhere to the writ of the Shastras, alone can be called the guardians of Dharma’s vitality. Preservation demands sacrifices and Bharatavarsha is a living testimony to that.

“AtmavidyA is the vidyA of bhArata,that is why bhArata is tyAgI”

If one does not know tyAga,one’s aim cannot be kept in focus on the path. Trying to attain Ishvara while gripping on to everything of this world is very difficult. If truth(satya) is to be established,then one has to give his life as an offering of ghee in the fire of time(kAlAgni). Like we see in the purANas,munis and R^ishis for the establishment of dharma would give their own blood as Ahutis tearing their chests open(translator’s note:this is probably metaphorical as to indicate the extent they went to). We are the sons of bhArata,and we are the ideals for the world. We cannot take other deshas as our ideals. Our desha has given us some gifts,(which are of such a nature) that the debts (to this desha) can never be paid back adequately. As impossible it is to pay back mAtR^i-R^iNa(the debts owed to one’s mother),similarly it’s impossible to pay back the R^iNas we owe to bhArata. bhArata is jananI and janmabhUmI.

If one does not have a calm/cool mind in the urge to keep up his vaishShTa(specialness),later on one will get lost in darkness in search of his aim. This desha has given me a lot,in comparison to that,what have I given?

I am not particularly inclined towards dharma since it is rather difficult to define it today. The astrological knowledge of years, months, days and constellation, remembering a distinguished figure and his life too, don’t help succeeed in the purpose. Man is as the centre of the world’s activity and hence commands the highest position in it.The stream of thoughts that flowed into the human minds of yore to conceptualize Nature is lost irreversibly. Now everyone has their own petty fantastical opinions that keep both the father and the mother in oblivion.

This land of Bharata alone is the seat of spirituality. Like a mother, she sheltered all religion even if a number of them didn’t except her as their own. I will not say that it is a sorry event. Everything is in Time’s(kAla) hands and we are merely his tools.He is the author of destiny while we are merely His tools.

In my opinion, we who are born in this segment of the eternal cylce of life and death offer only a fraction of it to Her and hence we find Her only in one segment of it. Meanwhile ,those who have submitted their entire selves to Her, not leaving behind either the body or the mind ,find Her to be the sole existence(all that exists). Dharma has been known since the times of yore and that is why the dedicated men of piety adopt all dharmas and engage themselves with the eternal divine sport.

shubham astu|(may there be auspiciousness) Jay Tara!

Nuances on the origin of tArA(entirely) in Tibet (in general)

abhinnah_apiLeave a comment
1. Tibetan tradition states that tArA herself was introduced into Tibet from Nepalese sources(the daughter of aMshuvarman),who got a sandalwood image of the devI when she married the first great Tibetan king Songtsen Gampo
2. Bauddha tradition mentions just those two forms as introduced by nAgArjuna from bhoTadesha:ekajaTA and possibly vajratArA(from the sAdhanAmAlA)
3. The 6-7th century aShTA~NgasaMgraha mentions tArA and mercury(nAgArjuna gets associated with rasAyana siddhis too in that tradition),but no mention of nAgArjuna.
4. ekajaTA,who is iconographically very similar to mahAchInakrama-tArA(and often identical) got incorporated into Astika sAdhanAs through the means of the pheTkariNI/pheTkarIya tanta which was quoted by AgAmavAgIsha in his bR^ihat tantrasAra,which popularised this form of tArA over other forms.(and these were the forms associated with the story of vasiShTha going over to mahAchIna and recieving the mantra from nArAyaNa in the form of buddha)