He is the blue-throated one, the wielder of the most tremendous powers, which could not be attempted, far less achieved by other Gods when the churned Ocean at the time of ‘Samudra Manthan’ exhaled poison Siva achieved quite simply by holding the poison in his throat. In knowledge, asceticism, renunciation, as also in enjoyment, he is the supreme consummation of all desires. Rudra is another name of Shiva, the “five-faced”. From Rudra comes all suffering, persecutions and oppressions, anger, ferocity of countenance or gruesomeness of noise. Hence knowledge and power become a double-edge sword used for destruction.Īrdra the earth is said to be starting its menstrual course that is “Ambobachi”.Arudra means wet or surcharged with water, that is fat.īecause the earth is running her menstrual course there are teardrops falling one after another. Rudra is the lord of wild animals and storms. This is a ‘teekshna Sangyak’ Nakshatra, leading to destructive acts.Īrdra is called atikshna Nakshatra with a gift from Brahma of “undefeatable power”. The animal symbol is a female dog (bitch) again confirming violence. These come through Ardra, which therefore needs to seek control over them.Īrdra is ruled by Rudra, the fierce form of Lord Shiva who represents thunder – Thunder power can make a person violent by nature.Ī native of ‘Ardra’ can be complaining and ungrateful. Rudra is the lord of the wild animals and all things wild, strange or disturbing. In Mesopotamia and Egypt, performative power was centered on the divine sign.
It, therefore, seems likely that in the same way that pictographic scripts played formative roles in Mesopotamian and Egyptian conceptions of the divine sign, the non-pictographic script played a role in shaping the Israelite conception of The Hebrew Bible’s preference for referencing oral as opposed to written modes of per.įormative power also might represent a conceptual shift with regard to the perceived locus of this power. Though later Jewish tradition recalls the role of the alphabet in the creative process (Babylonian Talmud Menahot 20b: Midrash Rabbah 1:10).
Moreover, unlike the Egyptian conception of creation, which permits a role for writing (Frankfurter 1994), the book of Genesis reports creation as solely an oral work. Nevertheless, they do appear to place a greater emphasis on orality in the interpretive process. The examples from Amos and Jeremiah do not entirely rule out the notion that divine signs were written down or conceived of in writing before interpreting them, because homonyms also operate on a visual level.
0 kommentar(er)
