[Advaita-l] Anya Devata

Jaldhar H. Vyas jaldhar at braincells.com
Sat Jul 31 00:55:51 CDT 2010

On Mon, 26 Jul 2010, Satish Arigela wrote:

> Going by above, vinAyaka of-course refers to gaNesha.

Right but just to make sure there is no confusion let me say again that
Shankaracharya isn't saying don't worship that Vinayaka but the lesser 
vinayakas who are worshipped out of fear that they will cause trouble if 
not appeased.

>> Matragana: the worship of saptamatrka or shodashamatrka is still prevalent to
>> this day.  They are often >propitiated at weddings so that the bride will not be
>> barren etc.
> Some names of the mAtR^ika-s might interest the person who posed this question.
> Like for example vaiShNavI, nArasiMhI, vArAhI etc. Since the number mentioned is
> 16, technically they could be referring to both sapta mAtR^ika-s and/or the
> skanda mAtR^ika-s.

The mothers of Skanda Bhagavan are the Krttikas six of the wives of the 
Saptarshis.  (Arundhati being excepted.)

In a prayoga book I have the Shodashamatrkas are named as Gauri, Padma, 
Shachi, Medha, Savitri, Vijaya, Jaya, Devasena, Svadha, Svaha, Mata, 
Lokamata, Shanti, Dhrti, Pushti, and Tushti.  They are specifically to be 
worshipped in the wedding mandapa for "avighna".

> chaturbhagini refers to the worship of tumburu rudra with his four sisters. Not
> tumburu the divine singer.
> This is a manifestation of rudra.
> This tumburu rudra is four faced with three eyes in each etc and around him are
> seated the four sisters. Their names being jaya vijaya, ajita and aparAjita who
> are worshiped with their own bIjakShara-s etc
> yogavAshiShTha also has a reference to this. This stream of shaiva tantra-s
> associated with his worship is called the vAma srotas and is so called because
> it emanates from the vAmadeva mukha(called umA vaktra alternately) of sadAshiva.
> This should not be confused with vAmAchAra but it does have some elements of
> vAmAchAra rituals. But a smArta brAhmaNa who follows the rituals of this stream
> will of-course do so by editing out those objectionable vAmA elements just like
> they do in the case of shrIvidyA which has similar vAmA-kaula origins.

Thankyou so much!  I've been wondering about this for a long time.

Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at braincells.com>

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list