[Advaita-l] sapta-mAtR^ika-s in ShAnkara GItA BhAShyam

Satish Arigela satisharigela at yahoo.com
Wed Jul 6 00:55:13 CDT 2011

Oh just saw this gem from shrI Anand:

 Bhaskar: Thank you for the note. I will take a look into those.

>Anand Hudli Writes:

 >The emphasis of both 9.25 and 17.4 is on the
>Worshipper, not so much on the Worshipped. 

No. You got it wrong.

> The whole idea of 17.4 is to show how we can infer the sattva, or
>other guNas in a person, by looking at what he worships. 

And 17.4 says worshipping the sapta mAtR^ika-s shows the person to be
of tAmasik disposition clearly

>If he worships the
>Gods he is sAttvika, if he worships Yakshas, etc. he is rAjasika, and if he
>worships Pretas and Bhutas, he is tAmasika.

Bad censorship! How come you left out the sapta mAtR^ika-s which were mentioned 
in the commentary along with preta-s and bhUta-s?

I suggest you avoid playing tricks like these.

> Then you say Vinayaka and the sapta Matrikas
>are clubbed with the pretas and bhUtagaNas. 

It is not me saying it.. it is the bhAShya which clubs the matR-s with preta-s 
and bhUta-s.

See again: pretAn bhUtagaNAMshcha *saptamAtR^ikAdIMshcha* anye yajante tAmasAH 

 >The only logical conclusion is that the two
>sets- that mentioned by the shankara and that mentioned in the Puranas- are
>not the same. 

It is not enough that one shouts that the sapta mAtR^ika-s mentioned in 17.4 and 
mentioned elsewhere in purANa-s are different. Please show it with some 
reference. Or if you have a different list please share the same with me or with 
the list. I am not completely challenging you here. As I mentioned in the post, 
I would with interest take notes and learn about the existence of a different 
set of sapta mAtR^ika-s

There is nothing new or of worth in your other statements.

>This is getting ridiculous.

Apparently nothing can be more ridiculous than you recent post on the topic with 
the boring repetition and censorship you seem to indulge in.


More information about the Advaita-l mailing list