'Temple to Love'-Bengali devotional architecture - 17th century Bengali devotional architecture

Ghosh, Pika. Temple to Love: Architecture and Devotion in Seventeenth-Century Bengal. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 2005.
ISBN: 0-253-34487-5

This is hot off the press. (it caught my eye and I snagged it off of the new releases shelf of the Univ. library)

I have read only the introduction and skimmed through the rest, and unfortunately don't have time to read more so this is really just an announcement, as I think this book would be of great intrest to many here.

The author explores Gaudiya temple construction and culture of the 16th, 17th, and 18th centuries, spending much time on the reign of Birhahambir and the temples of Vishnupur. There are also a few mosques discussed.

Discussion of Gaudiya philosophy and its relation to temple culture, as well as a fascinating discussion of different building materials, temple inscriptions, and the progression of Bengali temple styles. Includes many well-done black and white photos as well.

The building of the Gaudiya Vaishnava temples in Kardaha, a few miles north of Calcutta, were initiated by Nityananda himself and later finished by his son. These are probably the oldest temples of the Gaudiya Vaishnavas and interestingly enough there can be seen in them Old Tantric symbols, much like in the early Christian Churches we see early pagan symbolism.

Hope I get that book..

namaskar,

jijjai

Would you define old tantric symbols?

Well frankly this is documented by Melville T. Kennedy in his book 'The Chaitanya Movement' back in 1924 who had directly seen and noted that upon visting Kardaha.

He uses the term 'Old Tantric Symbols', and I can only assume that he was referring to common Tantra symbols which very much permeated Bengal before the advent of Gaudiya Vaishnavism and simply added 'Old' as it predated those Gaudiya temples.

namaskar,

jijaji

Well, what are any tantric symbols? I'm not too familiar with the scene.

Here's a few....

Aren't yantras and the such a common feature in Indian architecture, vastu and all that? You'll find yantras and mandalas described even in some texts the Gaudiyas subscribe to.

Without having something more specific on what the old tantric symbols on the walls were, it's hard to say whether it tells of anything of significance.

Well sure, however the tantrics probably developed them much more and implemented them into their system more than others it seems.

I guess you can think that if you need, however I do think Melville probably could recognize them frankly and I have no reason to doubt his 1st hand account.

blessed be,

jijaji

It's anyone's guess what they may have been if Melville Kennedy doesn't specify them. Tantric is such a vague term it can mean virtually anything, and therefore isn't very meaningful at all unless specified.

Please note that it isn't disputed that there is definite influence from the Tantric tradition on Gaudiya thought, as evident from the multitudes of Tantras, Agamas and Samhitas cited in the works of the Goswamis.

I think it could be meaningful in a very general way if you want it to be, you don't have to of course.

Noted, however the tantric symbols Melville mentions surely must have been of the Bengali type.

Om Tat Sat,

jijaji

Located at Dakshin Raghabpur in Pabna town, this temple was built by the Vishnupur Raja's in the early 17th century. Its entrance facade is enriched with intricate terracotta panels, depicting, apart from a profuse number of floral scrolls, several scenes from Hindu mythology on the spandrels of the three arched openings.

The most ornate example of the nava-ratna or nine towered temple, the Kantanagar Temple at Dinajpur was built in 1752 by Maharaja Pran Nath. Its sandstone blocks are believed to have been quarried from the ruins of the ancient city of Bangarh near Gangarampur in West Bengal.

Bakranath Temple at Bakreswar near Siuri in West Bengal: Built in the Oriyan style, the large temple is the most imortant of the several shrines in Bakreswar. Hot springs are another feature of interest in this town.

Khajuraho - Although not Bengali I wanted to post this as it is truly a wonder among temples in India and certainly the Tantric symbolism is 'evident' to say the least.
Ghandi wanted it destroyed it agitated him so much

To add few notes on it Jijaji,
The temple of khardaha was not built by Nityananda prabhu , but by his son Virabhadra prabhu after he found his Shyamsundar. That is a big sweet history which may be discussed later. We are asscoiated with Khardaha Goswami prabhu's and celebrate utsava on behalf of our beloved Late Krishana Chandra Goswami Prabhupada for Shyamsundar on 7 th of Chaitra every year.

Someday I will post the image of ShyamSundar and hope you will all relish his unparallel beauty.


Pranam
Dasanudas

Can you post a pix of the temple, with some close ups of the tantric symbols if possible

BTW, Melville says Nityananda started it, so he could have meant he was the inspiration and Virabhadra did the actual construction.

I found this other reference to 'tantric symbols there..

Also
dasanudasji,

If possible can you clarify if that temple in Kardaha was built before or after Virabhadra was threatened with excommunication by the Gosvamis of Braja or if it was built before or after the the event of Virabhadra bringing into the fold of Vaishnavism 1200 bhikshus and 1300 bhikshunis from the Buddhist community? Also known as the Nera-Neris...

namaskar,

jijaji

East side of the west portico, taken from the south, with indirect sunlight from the north (sorry, my camera doesn't do close-ups very well):

[attachmentid=1655]

This dhani-yantra is typical of ancient tantric symbols. Clearly visible here is the phased opposition of balanced forces in the universe, with the downward triangle signifying as it traditionally does the dynamic aspect (Shakti) and the upward triangle signifying the inert aspect (Shiva). The eye represents a big ol' eye. Creepy, ain't it?

Dandavats,
Lancer

My apologies, but I'm leaving town for a few days on business and feel really anxious about it, and I just couldn't resist taking advantage of this rather interesting topic to let off a little stress. And it's the first mystic symbol I could think of offhand. Those spiral shimmery things wig me out, anyway.

My question was directed towards dasanudasji,

I was referring to the Tantric symbols on the Temple at Kardaha Lancerji, just to clarify...

although I appreciate your post...

accha,

jijaji

I have an old book on the sexual tantric statues outside of many temples if anyone wants to buy it, its just sitting here doing nothing and holds no interest to me. I did however have to pay for it and would be happy to take some pics or scan somethig in advance. (not the dirty stuff of course, ladies are present)

brajamani

Could you give me a reference to this?

You sound as if you doubt it..? Besides anything I post as a reference you will just poo pooh

This is news to me too. jijaji kindly give more light on it and also reference.

I'll post some later on in this regard...

still working here, I can post some reference to the Nera Neris getting shaved up as well if anyone likes...

that was a pretty radical thing that Virabhadra did ya know...

blessed be,

jijaji & co.

It seems, at least for me, it's not so much an issue of whether the tantric influence is there in Gaudiya Vaisnavism or not, that doesn't necessarily reflect its validity or invalidity; but rather the overall reluctance to accept what Bengali tantric/shakta elements that may exist (historically or texturally speaking) within the tradition is what I find strange (and Jijjaji and Melville aren't the only to note, perhaps Dimock too?).

If Nitai and Virabhadra did absorb the tantric crowd into the Gaudiya Vaisnava fold, what is the problem? If the (tantric) symbols are actually carved on the temple, does it really matter? Why is it such a contested issue, either way? That Shakti-Tantra and other similar practice was predominant in Bengal at the time of Caitanya-Nitai was no secret (e.g. CB Adi 2.86-7).

I thought about givin a reference, I realy did, and started goin thru all my books and started thinkin...

"Hey, wait a minute jijaji, you will only get 'poo poohed' like you did when you mentioned that Melville noted Tantric symbols on the Kardaha temples"

Recently I have seen other poo poohs goin down, like angrezi's mention of Char Dham on another thread as well as the animal products in GV practice thread....

so I'm gonna withhold and not allow myself to get poo poohed

But for those who have the resources...The reference is in the writings of Melville, A.K. Majumdar, and S.K. De.

Now.. the Nera Neris who were 'buddhist sahajiyas' that Virabhadra brought into the fold is referenced all over the place, even by Jagat here;



* * * * *

As far as Virabhadra is concerned he comes from a family that without question have had eyes raised about certain goings on, not only academic scholars outside the tradition, but also other 'Gaudiya faithful' within the tradition, as having 'Tantric leanings, including his father the 'Avadhuta'.

Look at this post Jagat contributed about 'Ramachandra' and his 'fish and mango' miracle he did for Virabhadras 'Buddhist sahajiya' Neri Neri disciples, would the Gosvamis of braja go along with that..?

And how come the Gosvamis don’t mention 'Nityananda at all in their writings if he was 'Balaram' did they just miss that altogether? Nityananda was even given some heat from Advaita for his 'wild' behavior and that friction continues to this day between those two families.

Dimock also says…

“It should be reiterated that there is little mention of the leaders of the Bengal branch, and even of the divinity of Chaitanya, in the writings of the Gosvamis”

There were major differences in the Gaudiya world before the time of Krishna Das's CC and even afterward, specifically between the Vrndavan school and the Bengal school that was primarily headed up by Nityananda and later Virabhadra.

Here’s a reference..’have fun’..

Melville mentions in ‘The Chaitanya Movement’..
“We have noted that for sometime before the death of Chaitanya there was more less a division in the sect, Nityananda being the leader of the party which was chiefly concerned with extending the sway of Vaishnavism among the masses of the population, regardless of caste rule and prejudices. Virabhadra evidently continued in his father’s footsteps until there was danger of a split. He was even threatened with excommunication by the Gosvamis of Brindaban, after which the differences were patched up after a fashion. In the Bhaktiratnakara, a historical work written in the early part of the eighteenth century, there is mentioned a letter from the six Gosvamis of Brindaban, expressing their pleasure over the return of Virabhadra to the fold”

As far as Virabhadra bringing the Sahajiya Buddhist Neri Neris into the fold, which is referenced by too many scholars to mention really…

Melville says..
“We cannot say for what purpose they were admitted. In the eyes of many of the leaders it must have been an unpopular step. Historically, this episode presents very clear evidence of the influence of the widespread ‘Tantricism’ of the day upon the movement. These Buddhist remnants represented a blend of Tantricism and Buddhism at its worst, and their admission into the Chaitanya movement seems to indicate a ‘Tantric’ leaning on the part of Nityananda and his son”

Again Melville says;

“ It is with interest to remember, in this connection, that Tantric symbols are to be found in one of the temples of Kardaha built by Nityananda and Virabhadra.”

Dimock quotes and acknowledges Melville as being authoritative and a ‘keen observer of Bengal society’; Dimock voices a similar opinion regarding the tantric leanings of Nityananda and even Sahajiya connections of Ramachandra and Jahanav…

Dimock ;

“There is considerable evidence of the Sahajiya leanings of many of Nityanandas followers. A list of those followers is given in Virvata Vilasa. It might be argued that since the Vivarta Vilasa is avowedly Sahajiya text, it selects Sahajiya followers of Nityananda for mention while omitting others. But the list is substantially the same as that given in Bhaktiratnakara 10;372 and that of CC Adi; 11, neither of which can realistically be called sahajiya in doctrine.”

“There is every indication that Ramachandra was a Sahajiya. Among his writings are the Sahajiya texts Kadaca, Ananda-manjari-samputika, and the middle-ground Pasanda-dalana. He was the grandson of Vamsi-vadana, the founder of the Sahajiya school of Kuliya. Among his pupils were various Sahajiyas, including akincana-das, the author of the Virvarta-vilas”

“It is said that Ramachandra persuaded his foster mother (Jahnava) to the sahajiya position. However she arrived at it, it is certain that at some point she did adopt such a position. In fact, she succeeded her husband as the leader of a considerable sahajiya group’ the list of Jahnava’s followers given in Bhaktiratnakara 10;372 ff. shows many of the same names given in the lists of Nityananda’s, including known Sahajiyas. It is significant that it was to a women that the leadership fell”
(women of course being considered most desirable as Guru in Tantric and Sahajiya tradition)

Aacha,



jijaji

Discussion on relating to academic views on GV has been split into a topic of its own.

Jijaji can you give me details of that symbol of temple of Kharadaha and exactly where that is found? I can verify when I will be back to India..

Also there is a possibility to wrongly assume different kind of sysmbol used as part of sculpture on ancient temple as some kind of tantrik symbol or so. Because in Hindu temple architecture there are so many similarly designed synbols availble meant for different inner meaning,there is fair chance to misinterpret that, though I am not claiming that being the case here.

Also there is big difference between tantra and sakta influence and practices.


Please read cc from top to bottom and see at what circumstances and what reasons goswamis at brindavan requested Krishna Das Kaviraj to write Chaitanya Charita mrita. You will get your answer.
Have you ever read Chaitanya Vagavata? That will give you answer about the so called exchange of heat between advaita and Nityananda.


This is incorrect observeation by author. As I already stated that temple was built by Virbhadra Goswami long time after disappearance of Sri Nityananda.

Pranam
Dasanudas

As pointed out by Dimock:


This shows that Nityananda wasn't singled out in the writings of the Goswamis. Aside a mention of the leaders of the Bengal branch, there is hardly any discussion on any other branch, including a broader picture of the Vrindavan branch. The only references I can think of are the occasional notes on some of Sri Chaitanya's companions in Nilachala, mentioned in the context of the few ashtakas and stotras in which they long to again see him. (Vide first three texts of Stavamala, first two texts of Stavavali.)

This line of argument, therefore, yields no support to the Goswamis' disapproval of Nityananda. Let's look at Melville Kennedy's statements regarding Virabhadra and the Goswamis first:



As far as I know, this friction was there between the followers of Nityananda and Advaita, both groups being based in Bengal - and rather unrelated to the Goswamis of Vrindavan. Granted, works such as Hari-bhakti-vilasa certainly have contributed to the presence of rigid rules and ceremonial observances, but there is little to suggest that the Vrindavan vairagi-community would have been all that preoccupied with caste rules and the such.



There is no such letter or reference in Bhakti-ratnakara. If there is and I've missed it, please feel free to cite it.

In the beginning of chapter 14, however, there is a mention of correspondence between the Goswamis of Vrindavan and Srinivasa Acharya concerning the incident with king Vira Hamvira, who plundered the shipment of books, and who was later converted by Srinivasa. The ninth chapter mentions how the Goswamis of Vrindavan had been offended by Vira Hamvira. At the end of the 14th chapter, there is also a note in Virachandra's letter to Srinivasa in the context of Virachandra's rejection of Jaya Gopala.

It seems that Melville Kennedy may have confused the two Viras as far as his conclusion derived from Bhakti-ratnakara is concerned.

Then, briefly on the quotes from Dimock:


Akinchan Dasa's Vivarta Vilasa is a commentary on Chaitanya Caritamrita. It shouldn't, then, surprise anyone if the commentary repeats the names of the followers of Nityananda mentioned in the text it comments on!

With regards to Ramachandra:

I am not familiar with Kadacha or the "middle-ground" Pashanda-dalana (lit. "refutation of disbelievers"). However, I am well familiar with Ananga-manjari-samputika (available at GGM). In fact, I have just read through the text again, looking for references that could possibly be interpreted as having sahajiya-connotations, and I have a hard time even finding such passages. The misdescription of Ananga-manjari-samputika, then, casts suspicion on the attribution of Kadacha as a sahajiya-text until proven otherwise.

With regards to Vamsivadana being the founder of the sahajiya-school of Kuliya. I believe this is a reference to the Baghna Para Goswamis and their Rasaraja-upasana. From that, however, it is a far stretch to being an all-out sahajiya.

In Jagadananda's article on Murali Vilasa, Vamsi Siksha and the Rasaraja Concept we find Ramakanta Chakravarti cited as follows regarding Ramachandra:


So that's something coming from a recognized scholar and from a different angle.

Can someone find a source for this? I believe it's from Murali-vilasa.

Apparently fish-eating wasn't seen as as big a deal as red meat. Indeed there are some who consider themselves Gaudiyas whilst including fish in their diet.

That is certainly a possibly I'll admit as he does not mention the exact verse. I'll give you that indeed..

However I must mention even though I quoted Kennedy , that S.K De quotes B. Majumdar in Vaishnava Faith and Movement that the evidence in Bhakti-ratnakara (18th century) is late and unreliable . An example given is where it is mentioned that Jiva, saw Chaitanya at Ramakeli which does not seem chronologically possible.

go figure..

namaskar,

jijaji

GP and I went to Baghnapara when I was there recently. Some of the Gosais there take this story as a metaphor of some kind. We purchased copies of Kananbihari Goswami, but I left mine in Mayapur. GP is going to send it to me in the near future. Goswami discusses the incident there. I believe I also posted RK Chakravarty's version of the incident somewhere in the Editiorials section way back.

I also picked up a copy of Muralivilasa in Radha Kund, which I was rather happy to find. It is a 1987 reprint of the 1908 edition; interestingly, from the Krishna Janma Sthan Seva Samsthan.

The story in question is in chapter 19, page 161. The words ilsA matsya are definitely there. Ramachandra goes to the pond, which he calls the Yamuna (which we saw is right next to the temple, but in a rather pitiful state today), and prays to Rama and Krishna, his deities. The fish come jumping right out of the water onto shore. Ramachandra Goswami gives them to his servants to clean and then goes off looking for mangoes, which are out of season.

I note that Ramachandra refers to the Neras several times as Vaishnavas. "vaiSNava-sevAte lAgi janma dhanya karo...! He cooks the fish with the mangoes--("ihA bolitei Ämra hoilo kAndi kAndi | Amrera sahita matsya bhAlomate rAndhi || dui hANri anna matsya DAla eka hANrA | prastuta kariyA prabhu DAke saba nADA |"... He remembers Jahnava while serving the Naras. "prabhu anna den pAte jAhnavA smariyA" There is no talk of offering the fish to the deities, though.

By the way, I notice that the GGD passage about the Madhva parampara is quoted in full on page 182. Interesting.

Well, it shouldn't be surprising if everything doesnt' check out historically, given the late date of the text and the contradictions in many of the earlier texts that have undoubtedly been the sources of the work aside the spoken heritage.

Regarding "Melville", we are sometimes talking about Melville and sometimes about Kennedy, while it's one person called Melville T. Kennedy who wrote the text we keep referring to. Do you think we could, just for the sake of clarity, just refer to him as Kennedy, like we refer to Dimock instead of Ed, and so forth.

Well of course he does they were converted and accepted into the vaishnava fold by Virabhadra, however their being from the Buddhist Sahajiya community is pretty much accepted.

aacha,

jijaji

sure..

I do have the book right in front of me, sorry for that....

I meant to draw attention to the fact that he does not quibble about their taste for fish, but respects them as Vaishnavas.

Sorry I misunderstood..

Well, the worship of Shiva and Durga could easily be construed as 'tantric' could it not? Especially considering the time and place here..?

goo goo g'joob,

jijaji

Reverence for Shiva is very important for Gaudiyas. For example Shiv-lingas are essential parts of Gaudiya Math mandiras, and the aparadh of neglecting Shiva is one area of Iskcon temple design which concerns GMers. Not so sure about durga.


***

From what I've had time to read here I am very impressed with Madhava's responses to these questions.

thats news to me...

Could you give me a reference to this?


goo goo g'joob,

jijaji

Reference?
Yes go to Gaudiya Math 'Srivas Angan' or 'Yogapitha' in Mayapur and offer pranam to Shiv-linga there as you enter. And many other GM temples. The sevaites there will tell you this is the proper thing to do.

When you visited Radhakund did you not do pranam to Dhamesvar Shiva at the 4 corners first?

Well yes I did at Radha Kunda...

but I never knew bout GM, or at least I never took notice when I visited them years ago as a youngster...

gee ya learn something new everyday hey..?


aacha,

jijaji

I think Madhava will agree with me that those of us who went from Iskcon to Gaudiya Math and then 'trad' have a different perspective to those who went 'straight from Iskcon'. This is also where I see things differently from Jagat I suspect, even though he visited GM.

In GM we became more 'Hinduised' you might say. We started to notice all the complexity in the worship going on in the Dhams, emerging from our perhaps protestant-influenced assumptions and preconceptions...

Well maybe...

But they see Shiva in a way much different than the Shaivite or Shakta traditions don't they? Not sure if that fits into 'hinduism'

Is there any reference for Shiva being a devotte of Krishna outside the Gaudiya tradition..? I don't think that's to be found in the Shaiva scriptures is it..?

blessed be,

jijaji

This came up in the context of the worship of Shiva and Durga by Ramachandra (a Gaudiya Vaishnava), and you suggested that the worship could be construed as tantric. Now that you've readily recognized how Gaudiyas approach the worship of Shiva, how does that reflect on your view of the probabilities of Ramachandra's mode of worship as far as Shiva and Durga go?



Well, it's all over the Srimad Bhagavatam. I'm not all that familiar with the rest of the Vaishnava-puranas, but for what little I've read, that doesn't seem to be an uncommon theme.

Without wanting to mix in the overall debate - the Bhagavata is the main Vaishnava Purana and the 'defeats' of Shiva vis a vis Visnu/Krishna, plus the showstopper 'vaisnavanam yatha sambhuh' are of course meant for a Vaishnava audience. I heard (but havent read) that the pastimes in which Krishna defeats Shiva in the Bhagavata are reversed in the Shaiva Puranas as far as winners/losers are concerned. Furthermore, the 2nd offence to the holy name gives a more balanced view of Vishnu vis a vis Shiva -
sivasya sri visnor ya iha guna namadi sakalam dhiya bhinnam pasyet - To see difference between the names and attributes of Siva and Sri Visnu..
That's all, ityalam

Of course it's all over SB, every purana extolls it's deity as the highest above all others and is worshipped by all the other Gods. The reason I said worship of Shiva/Durga could be construed as 'tantric' was because it was not worship of only Shiva, but included Shakti...'The' Tantric Goddess...

The Universe of Sanatan Dharma does not center around the Gaudiya faith I am sorry to tell you no matter how much you can find reference for that in your own scriptures.

all the best,

jijaji

Since this thread has split severly from it's original intent on 'Bengali devotional architecture', that angrezi had in mind and has become focused so much on 'tantra', I was wondering if we could split it off into another thread..

maybe something like 'Tantra influence in Gaudiya Vaishnavism' or something like that?

cheers,

jijaji

Remember this ?

Why Differences among the Gods ?
(HinduDharma: Puranas)

Each Purana is in the main devoted to a particular devata. In the Siva Purana it is stated: "Siva is the Supreme Being. He is the highest authority for creation, sustenance and dissolution. It is at his behest, and under him, that Visnu funtions as protector. Visnu is a mere bhogin, trapped in Maya. Siva is a yogin and jnana incarnate. Visnu is subject to Siva and worships him. Once when he opposed Siva he suffered humiliation at his hands". Stories are told to illustrate such assertions.

In the Vaisnava Puranas you see the reverse. They contain stories to support the view that Visnu is superior to Siva. "Is Siva a god, he who dwells in the burning grounds with spirits and goblins for company? " these Puranas ask.

In each Purana thus a particular deity is exalted over others. It may be Subrahmanya, Ganapati or Surya. Each such deity is declared to be the Supreme God and all others are said to worship him. When, out of pride, they refuse to worship him they are humbled.

Doubts arise in our minds about such contradictory accounts. "Which of these stories is true? " we are inclined to ask. "And which is false? They cannot all of them be true. If Siva worships Visnu, how does it stand to reason that Visnu should adore Siva? If Amba is superior to the Trimurti (Brahma, Visnu and Mahesvara), how is it right to say that she remains submissive to Parameswara as his devoted consort? Are all the Puranas true? Or are they all lies? "

Logical thinking seems to point to the conclusion that all Puranic stories cannot be true. But, as a matter of fact, they are. A deity that suffers defeat at one time at the hands of another emerges triumphant on another occasion. And a god who worships another deity is himself the object of worship at other times. How is this so and why?

The Paramatman is one and only one. He it is that creates, sustains and destroys. And it is he who exfoliates as the the many different deities. Why does he do so? He has not cast people in the same mould. He has created them all differently, with different attitudes, the purpose being to make the affairs of the world interesting by imparting variety to them. The Paramatman himself assumes different forms to suit the temperament of different people so that each worship him in the form he likes and obtain happiness. This is the reason why the one and only Paramatman manifests himself as so many different deities.

Everybody must have firm faith in, and devotion for, his chosen deity. He must learn to believe that this deity of his is the Paramatman, that there is no power higher. That is the reason why each manifestation or form of the Supreme Godhead reveals itself to be higher than other forms or manifestations. It is thus that these other forms are shown to have worshipped it or suffered defeat at its hands. Altogether it means that each deity worships other deities and is in turn worshipped by others. Also each god suffers defeat at the hands of other gods and, at the same time, inflicts defeat on them.

In the Saiva Puranas all those aspects that proclaim the glory of Siva are brought together. Similarly, in the case of the Vaisnava Puranas that deal with Visnu. Amba, Subrahmanya and other deities are each of them dealt with in such a way as to show him or her to be the highest among the devatas.

The purpose of exalting a particular deity over the another is not to depreciate the latter. The underlying idea is that a person who worships his chosen god has unflinching faith in him and becomes totally devoted to him. Such exclusive devotion is called "ananyabhakti". The idea here, however, is not to regard other devatas as inferior to one's own chosen deity- an example of "nahi ninda nyaya".

Those who are capable of looking upon all deities as the manifestations of the one and only Paramatman have no cause for exclusive devotion to any one of them. It is only when we think that one deity is separate from- or alien to- another that the question arises of giving up one for another. If we realise that all are the different disguises of the One Reality, the various gods and goddesses potrayed in the Puranas, with all the differences among them, will be understood to be nothing but the lila or sport of Supreme Being. It is the One alone that seems divided into manifold entities. This is to help men of various attitudes and temperaments. If this truth is recognised we shall be able to see the stories in the Puranas- stories that seem contradictory- in the true light.

In the story of Banasura we see that Siva is vanquished by Krsna. But in the story of Tiruvannamalai, Visnu meets with failure in finding the feet of Siva. Both stories must be treated as truthful. The first is to make devotees of Krsna worship him as the Paramatman and the second to make devotees of Siva adore him similarly. Although we think that one is winner and the other the loser or that the one is superior to the other or inferior to him, the two know themselves to be one. Does one triumph over oneself- or does one inflict defeat upon oneself? So all this is play. The Parmatman indulges in sport assuming multifarious forms.

The purpose of the Puranas is to show people the right path. Pativratya is a virtue that is of the utmost importance. Amba herself exemplifies it. The Parasakti, the Supreme Power that she is, remains subject to her husband. Faith and devotion must grow in the world and for it the Lord himself must show the way. This is why in some temples Visnu is represented as a worshipper of Siva and in some other shrines Siva is seen as a devotee of Visnu. The same with other deities. I have spoken more about Siva and Visnu since Saivism and Vaisnavism are the two major divisions.

To sum up, if a deity is glorified in the Puranas, and stories told in support of it, it is to create exclusive devotion to him as the Paramatman. And, if any god is potrayed as inferior to another, the true purpose of it is not to denigrate him but to develop unflinching faith in the latter.

Om Tat Sat,

jijaji

EKTESVARA

THE TEMPLES IN 24 PARGANAS

On the way from Diamond Harbor to Kaka-dwip come the villages of Karanjali and Kanta Benia, which also bring nostalgia. The two villages have thrown out a large number of stone images, pillars and terracotta. The images of the deities are mostly Vishnu, Vasudeva or Ganesha. At Kanta Benia village a large image of parshwa Nath is worshipped in the same temple with Bishalakshi Devi. Bishalakshi Devi is the presiding deity of thefishermen. This image of Parshwa Nath is superb. Among the gramya-devtas (village deities) Baba Thakur and Shitala Devi are the more prominent ones.

Baba Thakur is a popular deity and worshipped by all communities. Both Hindus and Muslims worship to Olaichandi or Bibima ward off the epidemics. Particular mention has also to be made of Panihati and Khardaha villages, which were very intimately associated with Vaishnavism and Sri Chaitanya Deva. There are ample references to these villages in the Vaishnava literature of the 16th and 17th centuries like Jayananda's Chaitanya Mangal, Krishna Das Kabiraj's Shri Chaitanya Charitamrit, and Brindaban Das's Chaitanya Bhagawat. But these villages have also preserved remnants of Sakti worship, tantricism, Natha cult and Pir-worship.
Author - P.C.Roy Choudhury

a loose reference perhaps...?

aacha,

jijaji

To crack the news, Bhagavata and other Vaishnava-puranas are not Gaudiya scriptures, nor do they represent the Gaudiya faith. The Gaudiya faith is a later development deriving inspiration from them. As a reminder on what prompted the issue, your question was:


I don't see why you need to then start telling about how "you are sorry" about how the universe of sanatana-dharma doesn't center around the Gaudiya faith after making a note suggesting that Shiva's being a devotee of Krishna would be unique to the Gaudiya thought. Please try to be a bit coherent with the line of discussion, or at least with regards to your own line of argumentation.

Ok Madhava whatever you say ...

But hey what about that 'Tantra influence in Gaudiya Vaishnavism' thread split I suggested? You think thats a good idea?

blessed be,

jijaji

Feel free to start one with an introduction to the issue.

As far as worship of Durga, that permeates Bengali culture even among those that are otherwise Vaishnavas. During festivals like Durga Puja they all become Saktas while they are clearly Vaishnavas during Gaura Purnima and Janmastami. So, the two subdivisions are obviously not mutually exclusive when it comes to the Bengalis.

I'm not sure I agree 100% with this Ramdasji, the shaktas and vaishnavas in bengal have a bit of friction over sectarian outlook I believe, of course there is always the syncretistvada of the unorthodox and sahajiya types. Perhaps difference is dropped during festival time as the belly is helping to overlook any onesidedness.

Excuse the late entry here, but a friend just emailed this to me and I thought it may fit;

Memorial Paraphernalia from the Caitanya Era

Dasaratha-suta Das

(A) Personal Items

(1) Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu's wooden sandals, clay water-pot and quilt - in His room called Gambhira at the Sri Radha-Kanta Matha, Jagannatha Puri.

(2) Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu's shawl (upper cloth) - at the Sri Madana-Mohana Mandira, Saithiya Bhadrak District, Orissa (on the bank of the Salindi River).

(3) Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu's wooden sandals, cloth and water-pot - at the Grantha-Mandira Sri Bhagavatacarya-Patabadi, Varaha-nagara, Calcutta.

(4) A wooden seat (asana) that Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu sent to Sri Gopala Bhatta Gosvami - at Sri Radha-Ramana Mandira, Vrndavana (mentioned in many biographies).

(5) Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu's wooden sandals - at Udaya Giri near Bhuvanesvara in Orissa.

(6) Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu's wooden paddle (that He used to cross the Ganga) - at Sri Gauridasa Pandita's Mandira, Ambika Kalna, Bengal, Nadiya District (mentioned in Bhakti-Ratnakara, 7.335).

(7) Sriman Nityananda Prabhu's turban - at Sri Haridasa Gosvami's home Navadvipa.

(8) Sriman Nityananda Prabhu's Ananta-Sila, Tripura-Sundari-Yantra, and wooden walking-stick - at Khadadaha Mandira, Bengal.

(9) Sri Sanatana Gosvami's fine Bhutanese blanket - at Etoya on the Yamuna River.

(10) Sri Abhirama Thakura's whip named Jaya-Mangala and his stick named Brahma-Danda - at his temple in Khana-kula Krsna-nagara, Bengal.

(11) Sri Haridasa Thakura's bead-bag and walking stick - at the Haridasa Thakura Matha, Jagannatha Puri, Orissa.

(12) Sri Raghu-nandana Thakura's ankle-bells - at the Mahanta Bati in Kudui-grama, Varddhamana, Bengal.

(13) Srinivasa Acarya Prabhu's wooden sandals - at Vana-Visnu-Pura, Bankuda.

(14) Sri Rasikananda Prabhu's neck-beds and quilt - at Sripata Gopi-vallabha-pura.

(15) Sri Locana Dasa Thakura's stone sitting-place that he had used when writing Sri Caitanya-Mangala - at Ko-grama, Varddhamana District.

(16) Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu's piece of dhoti - kept in the family of Lokanatha Swami (ISKCON). Part of it also keeps Indradyumna Swami.

[attachmentid=1732]

The third Mahavidya is Tripura-Sundari-Yantra (lovely in the 3 worlds), also known as Sodasi and Lalita among a string of other names. She is the zenith of the creative cycle when the entire universe, like a flower, is in full bloom. She is the chief deity of the Sri Vidya form of worship, and is contacted either in the central circuit of the Sri Yantra, or in her own yantra, the Nava-Yoni Chakra. Her anthropomorphic qualities are brilliancy, manifestation, sweetness, depth, fixity, energy, grace, and generosity.

(The Tripura-Sundari-Yantra is without question a Tantric Yantra)

The feminine noun "tripurasundari" means beauty `par excellence', in the triad (tripura). The word "tripura" can be interpreted in several ways. First, The kALlikA purANaM states that by the will of the pradhAna (the First Principle), the body of shiva became triple: the upper part became brahma, the middle, vishNu, and the lower, rudra, As these three "pura"s (bodies) are in Him, shiva is called tripura, and his spouse is tripurA In this context, it is interesting to note the following. In Andhra Pradesh, about 20 kilomnetres from Kalahasthi, there is a small shiva shrine and liN^gaM, at Gudimallam. It is believed this shiva liN^ghaM was installed by parasurAma. The lower part bears the form of a gAndharva, the middle part, that of parasurAma with a turban, and the upper part, that of shiva liN^gaM. Under a curse, once brahma became a gAndharwa, by name CitrasEna. Therefore, the lower part could be brahma, and the middle one vishNu, since parasurama is an avatAraM of vishNu. This fact is mentioned in the Tamil book: "Jagadguruvin Upadeshangal" (Appendix, page 23, 1957).

Tripura has another meaning: The dEvi's mantra consists of three syllables; the paJNchadashaakshari mantraM is composed of three peaks (kUTa), namely vAgbhatakUTa, kAmarAja kUTa, and shakta kUTa. The nADis (nerves currents) where she resides are three: sushumna, piN^gaLa, and ida). Her shaktis are three, ichcha, kriya, and GYAna.

From Intro to || Tripurasundari Astakam|| at ambaa.org

QUOTE(Madhava @ Jun 21 2005, 12:23 AM)

Aren't yantras and the such a common feature in Indian architecture, vastu and all that? You'll find yantras and mandalas described even in some texts the Gaudiyas subscribe to.

Without having something more specific on what the old tantric symbols on the walls were, it's hard to say whether it tells of anything of significance.

If the Tripura-Sundari-Yantra at Kardaha Mandira in Bengal is found among the actual belongings of Nityananda and considered part of the Memorial Paraphernalia from the Caitanya Era, I dont think Kennedy's claim of seeing 'Tantric Symbols' on the Kardaha Mandira should be considered such a conjecture on his part, considering that Nityananda himself possessed such a Yantra and it is currently found at the Temple. Certainly Tripura-Sundari-Yantra is a Tantric Symbol indeed.

shanti