The demise of the (non-avian) dinosaurs was truly apocalyptic and even worse than we imagined, essentially hell on earth. It seems the Destructrix is a hard task-master...
Friday, September 18, 2026
En DÖP:s klagan?
Skulle vara intressant att få veta vad skribenten anser om adoptioner. Fast strängt taget bryr jag mig inte. Jag är nämligen inte en DÖP (Dunham-överintresserad person). Har väl bara kommenterat henne typ två gånger tidigare på den här bloggen...
Trimurtix?
From Wikipedia: "The female-centric Shaktidharma denomination assigns the eminent roles of the three forms (Trimurti) of Supreme Divinity not to masculine gods but instead to feminine goddesses: Mahasarasvati (Creatrix), Mahalaxmi (Preservatrix) and Mahakali (Destructrix)."
Ahem, are "Preservatrix" and "Destructrix" real English words or some kind of strange neologisms? Let´s find out, chat. Let´s ask our amigo!
[ChatGPT comments]
Yes. “Preservatrix” and “Destructrix” are understandable English formations, but they are not ordinary, established English words. In the Wikipedia passage you quoted, they are essentially neologistic/feminine formations, apparently created to parallel “Creatrix.”
The linguistic pattern
The three words are:
- Creatrix — an established English word, historically borrowed from Latin crēātrīx, “female creator.” It has genuine dictionary usage, although it is uncommon and somewhat formal/archaic.
- Preservatrix — formed from preserve + the Latinate feminine-agent suffix -trix. It means “female preserver,” but is extremely rare and is not a normal English vocabulary item.
- Destructrix — similarly formed from destruct + -rix/-trix, meaning “female destroyer.” It is also extremely rare and not standard everyday English.
So the Wikipedia terminology is essentially:
Creatrix — Preservatrix — Destructrix
Creator — Preserver — Destroyer
with the last two deliberately feminized to make the Sanskrit theological triad grammatically parallel.
Interestingly, the terminology is not merely an invention of the Wikipedia editor. The exact sequence appears in English translations/discussions of Śākta theology. For example, an English translation of the Devī Bhāgavata Purāṇa uses “Creatrix, Preservatrix and Destructrix” in describing Devī's cosmic functions. John Woodroffe likewise uses “Creatrix, Preservatrix, and Destroyer” when discussing Śakti.
But “Preservatrix” is particularly odd
Preservatrix is morphologically transparent, but English normally says:
female preserver
rather than preservatrix.
The suffix -trix comes from Latin feminine agent nouns, as in:
- creator → creatrix
- administrator → administratrix
- executor → executrix
- aviator → aviatrix
But preservatrix and destructrix never became comparably established English nouns.
There is also a slight morphological awkwardness with destructrix. Classical Latin has dēstrūctrix (“female destroyer”), so the form isn't linguistically nonsensical; it is a perfectly plausible Latin-derived formation. But its English use is exceedingly uncommon.
And there is an important Wikipedia issue here
The wording makes it sound as though “Creatrix, Preservatrix and Destructrix” are traditional Sanskrit theological titles. They aren't.
The underlying Sanskrit concepts are much more straightforward:
sṛṣṭi — creation
sthiti — preservation/maintenance
saṃhāra / laya — destruction/dissolution
And in Śākta theology Devī/Śakti herself can perform all three functions. The Devī Bhāgavata, for example, describes the Goddess as sṛṣṭi-sthiti-anta-kāriṇī — essentially “she who performs creation, preservation and dissolution.”
The specific assignment
Mahāsarasvatī = Creatrix
Mahālakṣmī = Preservatrix
Mahākālī = Destructrix
is the English-language presentation of the feminine Tridevī/Trimūrti scheme, rather than a set of Sanskrit technical terms corresponding literally to those English words. The current Wikipedia article itself presents exactly that scheme.
So I would translate the passage more naturally as:
Mahāsarasvatī — the Creator
Mahālakṣmī — the Preserver
Mahākālī — the Destroyer
even though all three are goddesses.
If one wants to emphasize their femininity, “Creatrix, Preservatrix, and Destructrix” is legitimate as a deliberately Latinate stylistic choice—but it sounds much more like theological English coinage than ordinary English.
And there is a particularly interesting point here: “Preservatrix” may actually be a better clue to the source tradition than “Mahalaxmi” itself, because that triplet reflects a specific modern English Śākta presentation of the Tridevī rather than the much more widespread Hindu identification of Lakṣmī simply as Viṣṇu's consort and goddess of śrī/fortune.
Efterarbete
Så moralpaniken om NMR på Estelles elitskola handlade om 14 elever som antagligen bara skämtade? Visst, ett dåligt skämt förvisso, men snälla. Hade nog blivit mer upprörd om de på fullt allvar stödröstat på Liberalerna!
Mythicism triumphant?
Prominent Jesus Mythicist Richard Carrier claims that Mythicism has won. Or is about to do so.
Thursday, September 17, 2026
Seriously now...
This is an extremely silly story, since a Golden Retriever *isn´t a fucking guard dog*. Period!
Friendly "guard dog" greets alleged San Diego burglar with toy in mouth
Back to the future
 |
| True Aghori getting ready for Platinga´s Terminator! |
Here is a worst case scenario. First, the "AI" bubble bursts, taking a large chunk of the economy with it. However, the really dangerous AI will be shielded from the collapse. Both the United States and China will continue to develop it. What happens *then* is anybody´s guess...
But probably not a Christmas party.
Pareidolia
I know its pareidolia, but I fucking saw this guy just the other day in some old oak. Of course, not as dramatic as in this AI-generated picture! He´s gone now. A bit weird. Why doesn´t the pareidolia work two days in a row? Something about the sunlight, the moss, or my idiosyncratic psychological states...? Been very tired in the afternoons for over a week now.
OK, so Pashupati-Cernunnos lives in a tree in "my" parkland. Got it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)