Sri Tripurasundari Gayathri & Sri Bala Sahasranamam. By Dr. R. Thiagarajan. • 1 song, Play on Spotify. 1. Sri Tripurasundari Gayathri & Sri Bala. COM 5 BALA TRIPURA SUNDARI SAHASRANAMA STOTRAM VI VAMAKESHWARA TANTRA 6 vishvAtmikA vishvamAtA. Find album reviews, stream songs, credits and award information for Sri Balatripura Sundari Sahasranamam – Prof. Thiagarajan on AllMusic –

Author: Tokree Malakree
Country: Portugal
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Life
Published (Last): 17 August 2018
Pages: 45
PDF File Size: 19.75 Mb
ePub File Size: 14.31 Mb
ISBN: 357-3-74232-888-1
Downloads: 75397
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Nikojora

More by Dr. R. Thiagarajan

Please clarify whether balaa manthra diksha is enough. Some mahans permit this. Irrespective of who says what, one should examine the shAstra pramANa for even an ativarNAshramI avadhUta does not truly perform actions that transgress shAstra maryAda, even while in a high state of ecstasy. Lord dattAtreya discourses on the same to sumedhas and you can refer to dattAtreya samhitA for further details.

Though it is beneficial to refer to other sources or tantras to examine this adhikAra, the chief sources are the purvOttara pIThikAs of the sahasranAma and the body of the sahasranAma itself. Some saharsanamam abheda between bAlA and lalitA, and cite this as the reason saahsranamam this assumed sanction.

If this were true, then abheda between keshava and lalitA is expressed in several shAstras. So, does that mean that one initiated into the hoary aShTakSharI mantra of sahqsranamam Lord is eligible to recite this sahasranAma?

Moreover, when dealing with a work related to names and forms, how can the same be neglected while arriving at adhikAra nirNaya? If this rule were to be true, those initiated into mantras of annapUrNA or hayArUDhA independently would qualify to recite the sahasranama as well. There is a nAma and mUrti bheda here.

Are the eight different versions of bAlA sahasranAma in the Tantras merely present for the sake of exhibition? No, they are meant to be used by the upAsakas of bAlA. Many times, when one talks of the word shrIvidyA, people tend to refer to bAlA as laghu shrIvidyA, which seems to me to be a balz notion than anything else. Here, Agastya avoids confusion clearly by referring to the fifteen lettered vidyA.

There is no mention saharsanamam of bAlA mantra here. Moreover, shrI bhAskararAya does not even accept this verse to merely mean panchadashI and declares that the reference here is certainly to ShodashI by stating what the Tantra defines as shrIvidyA:. So where are we talking about bAlA here? One can only assume that a person qualified to recite the sahasranAma on account of panchadashI [or ShoDashI in a more strict sense] is already initiated into bAlA as sahasranamzm is pUrvAnga to parameshwarI.

Sahasramamam, there is no pramANa or even logic in assuming the vice versa to be true and claiming bAlA mantra as the qualifying factor for shrIvidyopAsanA, shrIchakrArchana etc.


If we examine the chapters that precede the sahasranAma in lalitopAkhyAna, this becomes evident even to the unenlightened. The one qualified, necessarily has bhakti, but that bhakti has to be essentially towards shrImAtA or lalitA, the central focus of this sahasranAma.

One who has bhakti towards kAlI will recite her sahasranAma, one attached to durgA eahasranamam recite hers and the same holds true for bAlA as well.

Though all devatAs are same in essence, the sattvaika ghanIbhUta svarUpa of mahAkAmeshwara mithuna, which distinguishes it from every other deity from shrIvidyA perspective, including bAlA, cannot be neglected when talking of names and forms.

Every commentator interprets this verse as panchadashI and there is no room for confusion here. Sahasranajam already established beyond doubt that the shrIvidyA that hayagrIva talks of is panchadashI at the least and not bAlA.

For those who still prefer to stick to the laghu shrIvidyA hook, the clarification follows in the above verse. Lord adds an adjective to the shrIvidyA that he is talking about: Merely eyeballing through this analogy presented by Lord hayashIrSha is sufficient to give one a fair idea on how the different pieces fit.

There is an ApatkAla charyA described next but we can simply consider the above general verse for our discussion. The devotee first worships the chakrarAja or shrIchakra by a bsla called navAvaraNa Krama, recites panchadashI and then recites the sahasranAma. This is the normal flow for the upAsaka who intends to practice the sahasranAma. Then there is an explicit prescription in this verse to recite the fifteen-lettered mantra.

Sahasranamamm, without panchadashI, the very basic practice prescribed by the Lord to the one desirous of reciting the sahasranAma, falls apart. The same flow is prescribed by lalitA parameshwarI herself, which cannot be ignored, even if one decides to ignore hayagrIva:. Sahzsranamam, further clarification on shrIvidyA, which is considered as essential to recite the sahasranAma, is offered ashasranamam vashinyAdayaH in the sahasranAma.

The three bIjas in bAlA mantra are called vAk, kAma and shakti bIjas and we tend to use the same nomenclature for the three components of panchadashI as well. But the distinction between the two is sahasrannamam made by the very technical usage of the word: Now, there are kAdi, hAdi and other bhedas.

Full text of “Bala Sahasranama Stotram Vamakeshwara Tantra Eng”

sahwsranamam To clarify that the reference here is to kAdi, the name kAmasevitA is inserted. This name is interpreted to mean either shuddhavidyA or bAlA based on bwla sUtra: One, bqla does not recite the name and is not initiated into the mantrarAja, is a pashu.

The Sahasranama should be kept as a secret [i. The word pashu has been explained earlier by the Lord [mantrarAjaM na vetti yaH]. This statement seems to be taken at a face value by most and ignored.


If one does not believe that Yoginis are present guarding the Sahasranama, as stated here, why would one believe the claims in the same work that reciting these names grants merit? Discussing sampradAyika rahasyas like shrIvidyA mantra tattva, mantrArtha etc. H H Mahasannidhanam during his visit to Bangalore in the late 90s [was it sahazranamam These days, especially in Andhra Desha, every person discusses Srividya like the local news.

But that was specific to that case and he never stated it to be a general rule. Once, Brahmasri Kamakoti Shastrigal, who played a very important role in the way things shaped up after the infamous daNDatyAga incident at Kanchipuram, recollected the visit to Mutt by an old lady from Kumbhakonam to see Paramacharya. The lady, along with her son, came in and said: Please assign this lowly being some mantra that I can recite in these tense times”.

H H immediately remarked, “Thyagaraja, how can you recite the sahasranAma? You do not have shrIvidyA upadesha. I only allowed your sahxsranamam to recite. You perform Gayatri Japa, till you get initiated”.

‎Sri Balatripura Sundari Sahasranamam by Prof. Thiagarajan & Sanskrit Scholars on Apple Music

A particular prescription given to a particular person by a mahAn is applicable only to that sahasfanamam case and balw be taken as a general rule, especially when it contradicts shAstra pramANa. Sometimes, with preraNA from paradevatA, great men relax rules but that is not a general rule that every layman can adopt. The Lord clearly hints at that as well:. If you have attained niShkAma bhava, what are you reciting this mantra for?

First of all, who is the central focus of this sahasranAma? Agastya, while sshasranamam at the context of the sahasranAma says: Moreover, shrI bhAskararAya does not even accept this verse to merely mean panchadashI and declares that the reference here is certainly to ShodashI by stating what the Tantra defines as shrIvidyA: When explicitly dealing with adhikAra nirNaya, the Lord says: Now, look at the very next verse: Analogy is very clear.

bxla One should next consider the actual practice of the sahasranAma: The same flow is prescribed by lalitA parameshwarI herself, which cannot be ignored, even if one decides to ignore hayagrIva: Again, one should refer to the names: Again, let us examine the uttarapIThikA: The Lord clearly hints at that as well: