Talk:Shri Gurudev Mahendranath/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Both the Uttara Kaula and Purva Kaula as well as the Adinatha Also called Goraksha siddhanta and Nandinatha Lineages exist in India and have many followers. How can Lineages with thousands of followers all over India become defunct with the passing of one english sadhu? 84.130.122.197

This is an encyclopedia article, please discuss on the talk page. You are welcome to document the Kaula sect on its own page along with the current gurus and their lineages. I am documenting what Shri Gurudev Mahendranath said on the matter. It may be that he said this to prevent Westerners from claiming parampara in these lineages, like Mike Magee did, as Shri Mahendranath's western initiates were/are not Sannyasis. I'd be happy to mention this and link to an article on the Kaula should you take the time to provide one. Might I respectfully suggest that you register and log in to work? –Adityanath 13:40, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

Sorry if i did something wrong in editing the article, i did it because it is so blantently wrong. I only stumbled upon this i dont know much about wikipedia and i dont think it will be worth for me creating an account. Nonetheless i give you this information maybe you can verify and change the encyclopedic article to fit with the facts.

Uttara Kaula is no Lineage. Generally nearly all tantric Shakta Acharas are part of Kaula achara nowadays. Uttara Kaula or Purva Kaula is not a designation for a Sampradaya much less for a guru Parampara or Guru mandali. Inside Kaula are two schools, all Kaulas belong to either the one or the other. The Purva Kaulas use the five Makaras in a symbolic way. They use coconut water for wine, Lehya for fish, Tila for meat, a garland of flowers for copulation, the five Makaras actually representing the five Tattwas and the Sadhana of Panchamakaras is basically prescribed for Tattwa Shuddhi Panchamakara practice is literal in Uttarakaulas whereas symbolic substitutes are used by the Purva Kaulas. Purva kaulas actually have some concept of Mithuna as Bhairavi and Bhairava but in Pradhana pose and Apradhana. However, the Uttarakaulas do not recognize Shiva Tattwa at all. They interpret shiva-yuvati as follows : Shiva-yuvati does not mean the consort of Shiva. It is Shivam itself that encompasses the Shiva-tattva within itself and manifests as the yuvati, the feminine consort. There is no Shiva-Shakti communion in the Sahasrara. Here only Shakti is said to be Upadana Karana and Sadhana involves the waking up of Shakti with Yoni puja, Chakra puja etc. The Siddhi obtained is called Kshana mukti. Adinatha is no lineage. It is also a school. The Natha Samparadaya has two main branches Adinatha and Nandinatha. The Adinatha or Gorak Panth is stationend in the North of India mainly and the Nandinatha in the south. There is a mixing up of terms in your writings. Most Kaulas are householders. Most of the Nathas are Sadhus but there are many householders also that are Nath yogi but the Natha are NEVER called sanyasin. Sanyasin are only those Sadhus who are part of the the ten orders of Shaiva ascetics as organised by Shankara.

I have no reason to disbelieve what you say. I am not an expert on all the classifications or divisions of Shaivism or Tantra. However, this article is based on what Shri Gurudev Mahendranath stated in his autobiography. As such, it should not be corrected. The correct approach would be to perhaps write an article or two on the Kaula and Nath traditions, and then to add a section disputing or clarifying Mahendranath's use of terms. He has simply stated that 1) He was given sannyas mantras and made a sanyasin by Shri Sadguru Lokanath, 2) He was initiated/inducted or whatever you want to call it into Adinatha sampradaya by the same guru, Shri Sadguru Lokanath 3) He was initiated, etc. into Uttara Kaula by Shri Pagala Baba. 4) He was Pagala Baba's successor.

Clearly Shri Mahendranath believed that Shri Lokanath was the sole guru or lineage holder of the Adinath tradition and that he was Shri Lokanath's only successor. The same clearly applies to his beliefs about Shri Pagala Baba and the Uttara Kaula. Certainly he may have been wrong about this. He was English and may have had various misconceptions about the Indian traditions he became involved with. On the other hand, he was writing for a western audience and may have simplified things for that audience in a way that does not make sense to a native of India. Again, the best way to bring this up is in a separate section at the end of the article with references to articles on the nature, structure, and history of the Adinatha sampradaya and the Kaula traditions.

Of course it is fine to add material to the article to clarify things. However, it should be done by adding a new section heading at the end (using == on either side of the title) and writing at least a paragraph of explanation. Also, it should be done in an encyclopedic form. In particular, the question posed in your addition, "How can Lineages with thousands of followers all over India become defunct with the passing of one english sadhu?" does not belong in an encyclopedia article. I will be happy to work with you to add a section that brings up your concerns while maintaining a neutral tone. For myself, I believe he simply meant to communicate to his western followers that he had not made them gurus of either tradition. So if we can approach this from the angle of what did he mean to say by his statements that you consider inaccurate, to what audience and to what end, I'm sure we can come up with a clarification that is not disrepectful to Shri Mahendranath. What do you think? --Adityanath 16:56, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hmm i dont know what you can do the situation is pretty unique-i never read anything like this before(that a Sampradaya ended with the death of a person) nor has such a thing be claimend before in the history of any School as far as i know. Maybe just write that he did say that he never fully iniitiated anyone in his lifetime and that the Parampara transmitted by him ended with him? I mean now it sounds as if some protestant missionarie said that the whole evangelical church ended with his demise. I dont know enough about the History of Natha and Kaula Schools to write a full article sorry.

Move??

It is a convention on Wikipedia to not have honorifics in the name. So, the article would be titled Krishna while Sri Krishna would be a re-direct. Same is the case with articles on several gurus, swamis and God-men. If Shri Gurudev Mahendranath is not the taken name with which he is referred to and if Shri is only a honorific, then it should be moved to "Gurudev Mahendranath." If his taken name is "Shri Gurudev Mahendranath," the article must stay under this title. His taken name was not clear from the article, hence this query here. --Gurubrahma 09:29, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

I originally titled the article Mahendranath. Some other Wikipedian immediately moved it to Shri Gurudev Mahendranath. Not sure why or what the rules are so I left it... Adityanath 23:18, 26 January 2006 (UTC)