Paulastyas: Nikumbhila = Pratyangira???

[venkat veeraraghavan]

Namaste Vidvans,

There is a mention of Nikumbhila devi as the kuladevi of Ravana's family. I am assuming that she was also the kuladevi of that line of Paulastyas. 

1. Are there any existing Paulastyas who have the same Kuladevi?

2. Where in shastra is the equivalence between Nikumbhila and Pratyangira drawn first?

Many thanks!

Kind Regards,

Venkat

[venkat veeraraghavan]

I am not sure if I should open a new thread for this topic, but since it was related to my older post I figured the following will nicely segue with the previous content.

If the kula devata of a family is really passed down the line of sons, how is it possible that people from the same gotra have different kuladevatas?

Is it possible that in the course of their wanderings they have replaced the kula devata with the grAma devata / deity of the place?

Ideally those descended from Shri Krishna in the line of yAdavAs should have somanAtha as kuladevata and those descended from ikShvAkUs should worship ranganAtha.

Is this still the case? 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/bvparishat/02dykPhz6Sw/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/7401fe66-b44f-4564-991b-c6ff1950a5ean%40googlegroups.com.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

>  Is it possible that in the course of their wanderings they have replaced the kula devata with the grAma devata / deity of the place?

---- Yes. 

Based on my fieldwork based studies, I can confirm that this happens.

I do not connect the Itihasa based Krishna descendent or Ikshwaku descendent kind of info with my data though. 

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAOWN-CbFEc%3DXaZ83zBGJuBsAi3SFsvxb6GuuUNJ78x7HAbv%3D-Q%40mail.gmail.com.

--

Nagaraj Paturi

 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

Senior Director, IndicA

BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, Maharashtra

BoS Kavikulaguru Kalidasa Sanskrit University, Ramtek, Maharashtra

BoS Veda Vijnana Gurukula, Bengaluru.

Member, Advisory Council, Veda Vijnana Shodha Samsthanam, Bengaluru

BoS Rashtram School of Public Leadership

Editor-in-Chief, International Journal of Studies in Public Leadership

Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies, 

FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education, 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

 

 

 

[G S S Murthy]

In Hassan district of Karnataka I have heard of families whose kuladevataa was Tirumalai Srinivasa having shifted their allegiance to Chikka tirupati Srinivasa [near Arasikere of Hassan dt.] due to the difficulty of travelling to Tirumalai..

Thanks and regards

Murthy

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAJGj9eZZ28WsDUmEcyXu-F2wCPTAEVcU16P9NYXkmgmh7QnbLw%40mail.gmail.com.

[venkat veeraraghavan]

So technically most families are worshipping their respective grama devatas and have lost touch with kuladevata aradhana.

This is one massive reason that might account for the loss of parampara and shishtacara in most families.

Are there NO records at all of which deities were worshipped by the branches of various gotras?

I am assuming that the rShi who started a pravara would pass on the same kuladevata to all branches that he is the originator of.

Unlike what SHri Murthy suggests this is not just a case of transferrance of alleigance from Tirumala to Arisikere...afterall Balaji is Balaji. What he probably refers to is the replacement of grama devata from Tirumala to Arisikere.

The shrIvatsa gotra with same pravara has kuladevatas ranging from Vaidyanatha swamy of vaitheeswaran koil to Vadakarai Janardana swamy.

Ditto for Kaundinya gotras with deities as diverse as Bhairava to Balaji.

So the current usage is a misnomer replacing grama devata for kuladevata.

Leads me to my real question. Is there any record of whom the rShis worshipped within their families as kuladevata? When and where is the earliest reference to kuladevata in shastra?

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAJGj9eZZ28WsDUmEcyXu-F2wCPTAEVcU16P9NYXkmgmh7QnbLw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Mahamaho. Subrahmanyam Korada]

नमो विद्वद्भ्यः

If the kula devata of a family is really passed down the line of sons, how is it possible that people from the same gotra have different kuladevatas?

Is it possible that in the course of their wanderings they have replaced the kula devata with the grAma devata / deity of the place?

                                                                                                                                                                                               --- Vid Venkat Veeraraghavan

There are no any hard and fast guidelines in शास्त्रs with regard to कुलदेवतापूजा -- गोत्रम्  and कुलदेवता do not go hand in glove .

 Only some families have this आचार ।

People having the same 'surname' (वंशनाम) will have the same कुलदेवता -- for example 'भमिडि’ is the surname of a group of people and

all of them have कामेश्वरी as  कुलदेवता ।

It many cases 'surname' in Telugu states is the name of the village of ancestors .  

Most of the भमिडि families assemble once a year and so कामेश्वरीव्रतम् (generally outsiders are not invited) is performed .

After विवाह also  they go for the व्रतम् - it is a काम्यकर्म  -- they say - on so and so date we will have कामेश्वरी (placed) ।

The कुलदेवताव्रतम् is separate from सत्यनारायणव्रतम् , which generally follows a विवाह ।

उपद्रष्ट and  सुसर्ल  families also have कामेश्वरी as कुलदेवता ।

सुसर्ल is the surname (family name) of my in-laws . But after विवाह the संप्रदाय of the groom prevails over that of the bride .

Some families here have वेङ्कटेश्वर as कुलदेवता । 

The term देवता (देवात्तल्  पा 5-4-27 , तल् स्वार्थिकः , ’तलन्तं स्त्रियाम्’) is applicable to both male and female -- अग्निर्देवता - गायत्री देवता ।

>Is there any record of whom the rShis worshipped within their families as kuladevata? When and where is the earliest reference to kuladevata in shastra? <

I did not see any reference which says that ऋषिs were worshipping some कुलदेवता । 

It is a later development - we may find कुलदेवतापूजा by नायिका in some काव्यम् or नाटकम् ।

Some people started performing कर्मs like गायत्रीहोम - होम for 108 times with गायत्रीमन्त्र -- we do not find any such कर्म either in कल्प or 

पूर्वमीमांसा ।

Some पुरोहितs tell people to do certain होम to achieve some goal and name it after some देवता -- गणपतिहोमः । 

The problem is  that due to lack of knowledge --

गतानुगतिको लोकः न लोकः पारमार्थिकः ।

गङ्गासैकतलिङ्गेन   विनष्टं ताम्रभाजनम् ॥

Of late , due to modern education and deterioration in the values of सनातनधर्म the last two generations have no knowledge of such कर्मs .

धन्यो’स्मि

   

Dr.Korada Subrahmanyam
Adju.Professor , Dept of Heritage Science and Technology, IIT, Hyderabad

299 Doyen , Serilingampally, Hyderabad 500 019
Ph:09866110741

Skype Id: Subrahmanyam Korada

Blog: Koradeeyam.blogspot.in 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CADi6ZRj1ZBdPCXH1Hs8fFCSsQ_YuK5f1boR9oDBqD7-1P1qwUg%40mail.gmail.com.

[venkat veeraraghavan]

Dear Shri Korada Garu,

Thank you for your detailed response giving practical and theoretical references to the lack of mention of this practice in kalpa and purva-mimamsa.

You also mention that some families have this practice and others don't. Doesn't this indicate the possibility that it was mainstream and later forgotten and/or fell into disuse or was replaced with local deities given constant migration? 

Given the extensive mention of Shri Ranganatha as the kuladevata of the ikshvakus being handed over to Vibhishana in many Vaishnava literature, please allow me the audacity of playing devil's advocate.

Just as many veda shakhas that were transmitted orally have become lupta, isn't the same possible for this in terms of both praxis and theory? Since writing down of praxis has been a relatively recent phenomenon, isn't it possible that the frequent migration, mass murders and destruction by external forces has caused an erasure of something central from racial memory and hence finds no mention in written sources?

The other issue of kAmyArtha vs dharmArtha is again fraught with ambiguity. Frequently we see in literature that kAmyArtha does satisfy the needs of dharma when normal means do not suffice. We see Rucika provide caru to his wife and mother-in-law at the same time for prajaprapti and the same is exchanged by the mother-in-law and results in rather agreeable consequences vis-a-vis dharma.  The result of this kAmyArtha exchange has normalised the consequences as dharma providing the subsequent and present context for us. 

The same can be said about Arjuna's quest for the Brahmashira/Pashupatastra. Isn't the widespread invocation of astras in the subsequent war in service of dharma? Given that there cannot be a normal solution to an extraordinary situation?

So, do we limit ourselves to the orbit of what shastra considers dharmArtha given  the very low state we have plumbed to as a civilisation? Or do we need something more to enable the upsurge of dharma in mass and individual consciousness?

Look forward to your thoughts on these...

Much Regards,

Venkat

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAKj2ELT%2BLad%3DY%2Bg%2Bb8ECNR6_%2BTMxm9yLusA2Jr5NGR7gXDbZJg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Mahamaho. Subrahmanyam Korada]

नमो विद्वद्भ्यः

Vid Venkat Veeraraghavan --

1.tthe possibility that it was mainstream and later forgotten and/or fell into disuse or was replaced with local deities given constant migration? 

many veda shakhas that were transmitted orally have become lupta, isn't the same possible for this in terms of both praxis and theory? 

>> The idea of constant migration is invented by some westerners . We do not buy it . ऋषिs are capable of perceiving any मन्त्र or प्रयोग with 

योगिप्रत्यक्षम् - ऋषयः प्रत्यक्षधर्माणः - says व्याकरणम् and निरुक्तम् । 

तेन प्रोक्तम् , तित्तिरिवरतन्तुखण्डिखोखाच्छण् , दृष्टं साम - says पाणिनि । आख्या प्रवचनात् - says जैमिनि (पू मी) ।

Cessation of certain कर्मs and  संप्रदाय after some time due to various reasons has been there and Patanjali goes on record (पस्पशाह्निकम् , 

महाभाष्य्म्) --

सत्रs running for one hundred years and one thousand years are mentioned in वेद and discussed in पूर्वमीमांसा । Patanjali says  long long ago

they were there - now nobody is performing - कल्पशास्त्र prescribes following वेदवचनम् --

अप्रयुक्ते दीर्घसत्रवत् (वार्तिकम् - कात्यायनः) । 

भाष्यम् -- यद्यप्यप्रयुक्ताः , अवश्यं दीर्घसत्रवत् लक्षणेन अनुविधेयाः । तद्यथा - दीर्घसत्राणि वार्षशतिकानि वार्षसहस्रिकाणि च , न चाद्यत्वे कश्चिदप्याहरति । केवलमृषिसंप्रदायो 

धर्म इति कृत्वा याज्ञिकाः शास्त्रेण अनुविदधते ।

About learning व्याकरणम् Patanjali says - long long ago ब्राह्मणs , after उपनयनम् , were learning  शिक्षा - व्याकरणम् - वेद  - in this order . but today

it is not the case - having learnt वेद they are rushing for marriage and say - we know वैदिकशब्दs from वेद and लौकिकशब्दs from लोक - so

learning व्याकरणम् is a waste --

पुराकल्पे एतदासीत् - संस्कारोत्तरकालं ब्राह्मणा व्याकरणं स्माधीयते । तेभ्यः तत्तत्स्थानकरणनादानुप्रदानज्ञेभ्यः वैदिकाः शब्दाः उपदिश्यन्ते । अद्यत्वे न तथा । वेदमधीत्य 

त्वरिता वक्तारो भवन्ति - वेदान्नो वैदिकाश्शब्दाः सिद्धाः । लोकाच्च लौकिकाः । अनर्थकं व्याकरणम् इति ।

You  put forward your surmise . My point is -  there is not  even a remote chance - neither any record - nor relevant शिष्टाचार । 

Many people have been worshipping different ग्रामदेवताः / क्षुद्रदेवताः ।  We cannot account for it .

2.The other issue of kAmyArtha vs dharmArtha is again fraught with ambiguity

The result of this kAmyArtha exchange has normalised the consequences as dharma providing the subsequent and present context for us. 

Isn't the widespread invocation of astras in the subsequent war in service of dharma? Given that there cannot be a normal solution to an extraordinary situation ?

>> I do not think so -- 

वेदो’खिलो धर्ममूलं स्मृतिशीले च तद्विदाम् ।

आचारश्चैव साधूनाम् आत्मनस्तुष्टिरेव च ॥ गौतमस्मृतिः - मनुस्मृतिः

It is very difficult to decide what is धर्म and what is अधर्म -- at times whatever one decides to do (when one is upon the horns of dilemma) is

धर्म -- धर्मस्य तत्त्वं निहितं गुहायाम् । 

एकं शास्त्रमधीयानः न विद्यात् शास्त्रनिश्चयम् -- सुश्रुतसंहिता ।

प्रज्ञा विवेकं लभते भिन्नैः आगमदर्शनैः ।

कियद्वा शक्यमुन्नेतुं स्वतर्कमनुधावता ॥ वाक्यकाण्डः , वाक्यपदीयम् ।

3. do we limit ourselves to the orbit of what shastra considers dharmArtha given  the very low state we have plumbed to as a civilisation? Or do we need something more to enable the upsurge of dharma in mass and individual consciousness?

>> one should equip himself with the knowledge of  works that prescribe and describe सनातनधर्म , i e वेदाः , इतिहासौ , पुराणानि etc. ,

preferably through गुरूपदेश , and can try to  encourage people to inculcate धार्मिकप्रवृत्ति । .

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAOWN-CY9cma3GZB%3DTfsd7D%2By_2e%3Dzh8xH%3DaRPGEN5-nzuu2KQg%40mail.gmail.com.

[venkat veeraraghavan]

Dear Shri Korada Garu,

Thanks very much for your detailed replies with reference.

>> The idea of constant migration is invented by some westerners . We do not buy it . ऋषिs are capable of perceiving any मन्त्र or प्रयोग with 

योगिप्रत्यक्षम् 

>>>Sir I am not referring to the AIT or any other similar theories of migration but to the movement of custodians of the rishi parampara. 

In more recent times many Kaundinyas have migrated all over India (and the world) while the place of origin is in Kundinapura in present day Vidarbha. MH.

Also when I mention migration and lack of written evidence of such matters, I am not ascribing this to the original authors the rishis but their custodians who were displaced in the course of history and libraries that were destroyed at various places. What we have now, is what was left from all those depredations.

Cessation of certain कर्मs and  संप्रदाय after some time due to various reasons has been there and Patanjali goes on record (पस्पशाह्निकम् , 

महाभाष्य्म्) --

सत्रs running for one hundred years and one thousand years 

>>> Yes sir most of the cessations were probably consequent to loss of adhikara for such matters. 

Regards,

Venkat

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAKj2ELTDS_wJaEMjGfmUFgVDEa1ArMmsZ4Q4iC3A7GJxbdnUeA%40mail.gmail.com.