The Glory of Polytheism

[CHANDRU1849]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp Email Share Link

Most historians agree that people in South India (including parts of Maharashtra and Gujarat) up until the 9th and 10th centuries for the most part were Buddhists and Jains.Shaivism and Vaishnavism were unknown to most South Indians until Chola kings of the 10th century (who were mostly Vaishnavites) started to spread their religion.

Most of the Chola Kings were Saivites and not Vaishnavites. At the time of construction of Meenakshi Temple in Madurai, the Pandian King who ruled Madurai was a Buddhist. He killed the entire people who were involved in the construction of the temple.

Each and every district in TN has a Shiva temple with repute. Some of them:

Chennai Kapaleeswarar, Marundheeswar, Kachaleeswarar etc.
Vellore Jalakandeeswarar
Kanchipuram Ekambareswarar
Tiruvennamalai Arunachalacheswar
Cuddalore Pataleeswarar
Chidambaram Natarajar
Vaitheeswaran Koil Vaidyanathar
Kumbakonam Kumbheswarar
Tanjore Big Temple
Tiruvanaikaval Arthnanareeswar
Madurai Meenakshi Amman
Rameswaram Ramanathar
Tenkasi Kasi Vishwanathar

Shiva worship might have been very popular during Chola and Pandia periods. It is said that Kumbheswarar Koil in Kumbakonam is more than 2000 years old. These temples were definitely not converted from other religions, since Linga worship is exclusive to Shaivism.

Shiva temples have STHALAPURAM, whereas it is not so in the case of Vishnu temples.

Jain temples might have been converted as Perumal temples, as there are lot similarities between Jains and Vaishnavists. Vaishnavites might have adopted some of the principles from Jainism, which suit them well - say Idol worship (big statues), dietary restrictions, use of silver vessels, drinking only well water etc.

Only in TN, Vaishnavites worship their principal deity as Perumal, and in all other places, it is either Rama or Krishna only the avatars.

While Mahashivarathri is being celebrated throughout wherever Shiva worship is prevalent, I am not sure whether Vaikunta Ekadasi has similar celebration throughout India and abroad.

 

[sarang]

subnormal people are so engrossed in indiscriminate copy paste culture that they become 'nan onnu sonna nane ada mathi pesuven'! and exhibit emptiness in thought, understanding and assimilation!

let them learn samskrit and tamizh and make minimum effort to acquaint with traditional historians.

The works from the Sangha period (particularly Silappatikaram written by the Jain monk Ilango Adigal) talk about the Tirumala temple but many Sanskrit texts particularly the Vishnu Purana do not mention anything about the shrine (obviously the temple is not mentioned in Mahabharata or the Ramayana). Ilango Adigal claims he visited the temple. But why is the Vishnu Purana silent on one of the most important Vishnu temples in India?

Instead of flying off the handle in a tangent
read other posts
http://www.tamilbrahmins.com/genera...lization-christianity-islam-4.html#post267384

In my post I said that Vishnu purana does not mention Balaji and not Tripathi. An average person will know that purana do not talk of temples. But some are not average.

 

[sarang]

1899: swami vivekananda; from collected works

ON THE BOUNDS OF HINDUISM

(Prabuddha Bharata, April, 1899)​

Having been directed by the Editor, writes our representative, to interview Swami Vivekananda on the question of converts to Hinduism, I found an opportunity one evening on the roof of a Ganga houseboat. It was after nightfall, and we had stopped at the embankment of the Ramakrishna Math, and there the Swami came down to speak with me.
Time and place were alike delightful. Overhead the stars, and around — the rolling Ganga; and on one side stood the dimly lighted building, with its background of palms and lofty shade-trees.
"I want to see you, Swami", I began, "on this matter of receiving back into Hinduism those who have been perverted from it. Is it your opinion that they should be received?"
"Certainly," said the Swami, "they can and ought to be taken."
He sat gravely for a moment, thinking, and then resumed. "Besides," he said, "we shall otherwise decrease in numbers. When the Mohammedans first came, we are said — I think on the authority of Ferishta, the oldest Mohammedan historian — to have been six hundred millions of Hindus. Now we are about two hundred millions. And then every man going out of the Hindu pale is not only a man less, but an enemy the more.
"Again, the vast majority of Hindu perverts to Islam and Christianity are perverts by the sword, or the descendants of these. It would be obviously unfair to subject these to disabilities of any kind. As to the case of born aliens, did you say? Why, born aliens have been converted in the past by crowds, and the process is still going on.
"In my own opinion, this statement not only applies to aboriginal tribes, to outlying nations, and to almost all our conquerors before the Mohammedan conquest, but also in the Purânas. I hold that they have been aliens thus adopted.
"Ceremonies of expiation are no doubt suitable in the case of willing converts, returning to their Mother-Church, as it were; but on those who were alienated by conquest — as in Kashmir and Nepal — or on strangers wishing to join us, no penance should be imposed."
"But of what caste would these people be, Swamiji?" I ventured to ask. "They must have some, or they can never be assimilated into the great body of Hindus. Where shall we look for their rightful place?"
"Returning converts", said the Swami quietly, "will gain their own castes, of course. And new people will make theirs. You will remember," he added, "that this has already been done in the case of Vaishnavism. Converts from different castes and aliens were all able to combine under that flag and form a caste by themselves — and a very respectable one too. From Râmânuja down to Chaitanya of Bengal, all great Vaishnava Teachers have done the same."
"And where should these new people expect to marry?" I asked.
"Amongst themselves, as they do now", said the Swami quietly.
"Then as to names," I enquired, "I suppose aliens and perverts who have adopted non-Hindu names should be named newly. Would you give them caste-names, or what?"
"Certainly," said the Swami, thoughtfully, "there is a great deal in a name!" and on this question he would say no more.
But my next enquiry drew blood. "Would you leave these new-comers, Swamiji, to choose their own form ofreligious belief out of many-visaged Hinduism, or would you chalk out a religion for them?"
"Can you ask that?" he said. "They will choose for themselves. For unless a man chooses for himself, the very spirit of Hinduism is destroyed. The essence of our Faith consists simply in this freedom of the Ishta."
I thought the utterance a weighty one, for the man before me has spent more years than any one else living I fancy, in studying the common bases of Hinduism in a scientific and sympathetic spirit — and the freedom of the Ishta is obviously a principle big enough to accommodate the world.
But the talk passed to other matters, and then with a cordial good night this great teacher of religion lifted his lantern and went back into the monastery, while I by the pathless paths of the Ganga, in and out amongst her crafts of many sizes, made the best of my way back to my Calcutta home.

 

[Vaagmi]

Dear Sri Sangom Sir,

This is in reply to your post #93 in this thread.

You had claimed in your post #85:

Parasurama, after reclaiming the land from the sea, is supposed to have consecrated 108 Shiva temples and 108 Durga temples for the well-being and prosperity of the people in Kerala. Please not that not one Vishnu or Krishna temple was set up; even the Padmanabhaswamy Temple according to legend starts with Vilvamangalam Swamiyar who is a much later entity compared to Parasurama.

And further in post#87 said this in reply to Shri Chandruji:

Dear Shri Chandru,
Parasurama, though now considered as an avataara of Vishnu, was, generally a Shiva devotee as may be seen from the following excerpts:—
"Parshuram (Parashurama, Parashuraman) is the sixth avatar of Vishnu, He is son of Renuka and the saptarishi Jamadagni. He lived during the last Treta Yuga, and is one of the seven immortals orChiranjivi, of Hinduism. He received an axe after undertaking terrible penance to please Shiva, who in turn taught him the martial arts. Parashurama is most known for ridding the world of kshatriyas twenty-one times over after the mighty king Kartavirya killed his father. He played important roles in theMahabharata and Ramayana, serving as mentor to Bhishma, Karna and Drona. Parashurama also fought back the advancing seas to save the lands of Konkan, Malabar and Kerala.
Parashurama is worshipped as mool purush, or founder, of the Bhumihar Brahmin, Chitpavan, Niyogi,Daivadnya, Mohyal, Shukla, Awasthi, Tyagi, Kothiyal, Anavil, Nambudiri Brahmin communities."(Parashurama - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

When I asked you for source of information you had said conveniently in post #93:

Dear Shri Vaagmi Sir,
I feel I will be correct - just as you had done in another context - to let me know if you have any source of info. to rebut this.

I found from the same wiki source which you had tapped above, the following information to rebut you:

1) Parasurama created just 7 temples or kshetras which are called Parasurama srishti and they are:

Paarasurama srishti:
Udupi
Kukke Subramanya
Koteshwara
Kumbasi
Sankarnarayana
Kollur
Gokarna

2) out of these so called Parasurama srishti there are two temples which have Vishnu as the murthy there and they are:
Udupi-Sri Krishna
Koteshwara-Sri Pattabhi Ramachandra.

So I conclude that you do not have a source (other than that Parasurama came in your dream one day and revealed it to you) to quote for your number 108 as well as those being exclusive Shiv kshetras- “not even one is for Vishnu or Krishna” are your exact words.

Or is it that you depend on various sources to support your pet beliefs? On wiki for proving that Parasurama was a devotee of Siva and some other source for the number of temples built by him because wiki says in the same page that only seven temples were built by Prasurama (against the 108 known only to you) and they included Vishnu temples also much against your belief that they were all only Siva temples?

 

[Vaagmi]

Dear Sri Sangom Sir,

Your post #93 for reference:

BTB, I am awaiting the details of Sudras getting educated in vedic times just as ordinarily as the higher castes and sources for that info.

I remember. Please wait. On reaching back home I will give you the info you want.

As regards Vaishnavam, I admit that my knowledge may not be adequate or correct, but what are the sources (again) which will prove that the Vaishnavam of the pre-sangam period, or sangam period was identical to what it became post-Ramanuja? Most importantly, do we have authentic sources to prove that the ancient Vishnavam of the Tamil country had the same kind of monotheistic worship of Narayana and His six different states, and so on? Were there brahmins who adhered to this kind of maayon worship only and eschewed all worship of Siva even in those ancient times? If they did was there no fear from the saiva group? What did they do with their Kattil & Thottil then? Were those people professing the ancient vaishnavism in Tholkaappiyam, Thirumurukaarruppatai, etc., wearing the naamam as it is today or was it absent?

We started with the definition of vaishnava as one who worships Vishnu as the only God. Going by this definition the pre-sangam and sangam period vaishnavas followed the religion of vaishnavam only. The same vaishnavam is followed even today by all the vaishnavas. Post-Ramanuja we got the philosophical and metaphysical insight of the vaishnavam well established and Ramanuja gave us that. Please note that Ramanuja never called his philosophical input by the name Visishtadvaita. It was a name given for convenience by vaishnavites who came later. Ramanuja thought he was only rediscovering the philosophical base of ancient vaishnavam just as Nathamuni rediscovered the lost Tamil Vedas in the anthology of 4000 hymns. So those who worshipped mayon, those who worshipped Narayana and those who worship Sri Venkateswara today are all people belonging to the same vaishnava religious belief system. Fear of other groups might have been there. There is no way we can determine that. But fear does not stop you believing in your religion. Your querry about the Naamam appears to be childish. But I will give you a reply. Naamam is external to an individual while steadfast bhakti to Narayana is all internal. When I go to work I do not wear any Namam. When I do my nityakarma I wear them prominently. On both situations my faith remains vaishnavam. So naamam or no naamam a vaishnavite is a vaishnavite just as vibhuti pattai or no pattai a saivite remains a saivite. None of my malayali friends in Trivandrum wear a pattai (the horizontal ash mark on forehead, hands and body) and yet they are all saivites only. Did the saivites of ancient India have these pattais or not? Any authentic source from which this info can be obtained please? LOL.

Unless there is clear supporting evidence for the above, what we will have is that the vedic people had already been known to the Tamil country by the Sangam period (either because there was an influx, as evidenced by the legend of Agastya going south, etc.) or that there was trade or political contacts between the Tamil people and the vedic people in the Gangetic plains as a result of which some bits and pieces of religious lore had permeated down south also.

This is a possibility.

References in the vedas to Narayana were not to the Srimannarayana of present day Vaishnavism; it was referring to 'the son of Nara, or the original man' who is the "Purusha" of the Purushasookta. In the absence of any evidence/proof that the vedic, upanishadic, etc., refer only to the Vaishnava Narayana, those denote Narayana as Purusha or the naH +ayana = one without change, i.e., the Brahman.

This is a lengthy subject. But let me try to give a gist.

Per Sanskrit grammar Narayana is a proper noun and not a common noun like Siva, Rudra, sambu etc., That settled let us take the word Narayana and look at it briefly:

Narayana means the Ayanam of nAras (plural of nAra). Here nAras are Chetana as well as achetana vastus (otherwise called the chit and achit in the universe). Ayanam means one who supports. (ஆதாரம் in Tamil). There are other detailed accepted methods of deriving the meaning under the bahuvrihi samAsam and thathpurusha samAsam of Sanskrit grammar and I am not going into the details of that. Enough to say that the name represents God who lives in the chetana and achetana vastu. To avoid any confusion it is enough if we understand that the name Narayana means everything is in Him and that He is in everything. The meaning you have given “the son of Nara is Narayana or that naH+ayanA” is not the way to break the word to know its meaning. It is specious. They are the meanings derived in a round about way by people who believe in sunyata because they have a closed mind which can not accept the other easily and readily derivable meaning. They labour hard (சுக்குமி+ளகுதி+பிலி kind of exercise) to distort the word.

So Narayana/vishnu was and is the God entity for the ancient vaishnavam as well as the present day vaishnavam with strong underlying reasons.

Therefore, what we are left with is that a deity called maayon, maal etc., who had similarities to the present day Narayana of the Vaishnavas.Also relevant is when the paancharaatra & vaikhaanasa aagamas were compiled and whether those sangam-age people singing about maayon, maal, etc., followed any one of these.

Honestly we have no idea about this. Your guess will be as good or bad as my guess. But this much is clear. The idol worship was prevalent in the times of Vedas. Agamas are primarily rule books for idol worship.

 

[Vaagmi]

post #101:

Shiva worship might have been very popular during Chola and Pandia periods. It is said that Kumbheswarar Koil in Kumbakonam is more than 2000 years old.

1. Gobi manchurian as a food item might have been very popular during period of the Maurya and Pallava dynasties. Don't ask me for proof. Note carefully that I have used the words "might have been". Might can only be right always.

2. It is said that until 1800 AD all the men on the earth had horns protruding from their head and all women had tails 4 feet long. Dont shout at me "nonsense" and demand for source of info. Note carefully that I have used the words "It is said that". Yes a cockroach came and said it to me in my dream yesterday. LOL.

 

[CHANDRU1849]

post #101:

1. Gobi manchurian as a food item might have been very popular during period of the Maurya and Pallava dynasties. Don't ask me for proof. Note carefully that I have used the words "might have been". Might can only

You probably say proof is not possible for everything. If that is the case, the following is also possible:

Puliodharai and Akkaravadisal were very popular even during Alexander's period, when Vaishanavism was in full swing in TN. Alexander used to visit Perumal Temple, waited patiently in the queue which was as long as 10 kms and got the prasadam. He donated vast stretch of land to the cook who prepared it. It led to fight between temple priests and the cook and the cook complained to Alexander. Alexander warned the people.

2. It is said that until 1800 AD all the men on the earth had horns protruding from their head and all women had tails 4 feet long. Dont shout at me "nonsense" and demand for source of info. Note carefully that I have used the words "It is said that". Yes a cockroach came and said it to me in my dream yesterday. LOL.

The same cockroach also added that it had the proof of Ramar Bridge but will not disclose, as it enjoys the fight between pro-bridgewalas and anti-bridgewalas. It also said that it had proof of STHALAPURAM of Vishnu temples TN but refused to disclose. LOL

 

[Vaagmi]

A weak laughter usually means that the person has no intelligent escape.

Intelligent escaping trick, thy name is prasad1 a.k.a Quora. LOL.

 

[sangom]

Dear Sri Sangom Sir,

This is in reply to your post #93 in this thread.

You had claimed in your post #85:


And further in post#87 said this in reply to Shri Chandruji:

[/I]

When I asked you for source of information you had said conveniently in post #93:



I found from the same wiki source which you had tapped above, the following information to rebut you:

1) Parasurama created just 7 temples or kshetras which are called Parasurama srishti and they are:

Paarasurama srishti:
Udupi
Kukke Subramanya
Koteshwara
Kumbasi
Sankarnarayana
Kollur
Gokarna

2) out of these so called Parasurama srishti there are two temples which have Vishnu as the murthy there and they are:
Udupi-Sri Krishna
Koteshwara-Sri Pattabhi Ramachandra.

So I conclude that you do not have a source (other than that Parasurama came in your dream one day and revealed it to you) to quote for your number 108 as well as those being exclusive Shiv kshetras- “not even one is for Vishnu or Krishna” are your exact words.

Or is it that you depend on various sources to support your pet beliefs? On wiki for proving that Parasurama was a devotee of Siva and some other source for the number of temples built by him because wiki says in the same page that only seven temples were built by Prasurama (against the 108 known only to you) and they included Vishnu temples also much against your belief that they were all only Siva temples?

Dear Shri Vaagmi Sir,

I am rather surprised that a Professor of your eminence, is so hasty and prone to "needling" your adversary unnecessarily. Such needling can be avoided, imho.

I quoted from the wiki page Parashurama - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. In that very same page, little down below, you will find the following section:—

"Beating back the Arabian Sea Lord Parashurama with Saraswat Brahmin settlers demanding Varuna make the seas recede to save the lands of Konkan and Kerala


Puranas write that the western coast of India was threatened by tumultuous waves and tempests, causing the land to be overcome by the sea. Parashurama fought back the advancing waters, demanding Varuna release the land of Konkan and Malabar. During their fight, Parashurama threw his axe into the sea. A mass of land rose up, but Varuna told him that because it was filled with salt, the land would be barren.[SUP][12][/SUP]
Parashurama then did a tapasya for Nagaraja, the King of Snakes. Parashurama asked him to spread serpents throughout the land so their venom would neutralize the salt filled earth. Nagaraja agreed, and a lush and fertile land grew. Thus, Parashurama pushed back the coastline between the foothills of the Western Ghats and the Arabian Sea, creating modern day Kerala.[SUP][12][/SUP]
The coastal area of Kerala, Konkan, Karnataka, Goa and Maharashtra, are today also known as Parashurama Kshetra or Land of Parashurama in homage.[SUP][13][/SUP] Puranas record that Parashurama placed statues of Shiva at 108 different locations throughout the reclaimed land, which still exist today.[SUP][14][/SUP][SUP][15][/SUP] Shiva, is the source of kundalini, and it around his neck that Nagaraja is coiled, and so the statues were in gratitude for their baneful cleansing of the land.[SUP][16][/SUP]

Then he took a winnowing basket, or Surpa, and threw it at the sea. The water retreated, and from the place the basket fell at Gokarna, land rose again. This land is called Kerala, or 'Siirparaka' (Brahmanda Purana, Chapters 98 and 99). It is also said that while beating back the sea, Parashurama fired an arrow from his mystical bow that landed in Goa at Benaulim, creating Salkache Tollem, or 'Lotus Lake'.[SUP][5][/SUP] "


The sentence in bold, blue font will show that I need not have gone to 'some other source' for the very common knowledge (handed down from generation to generation by word of mouth). I understand, besides, that the text "Keralolpatthi" in rather outdated Malayalam, which the Namboodiris hold as equal to scriptures (just as Vaishnavas seem to hold the itihaasas as scriptures, and not as works composed by humans) also states the same 108 Siva temples and 108 Bhagavathi (Durga) temples. In this url you will find the list of these 108 Shiva temples; permit me to say that old people - smaarthas - used to recite these lines after their morning bath, during my childhood.

The legend or traditional belief is that Parasurama installed the Siva Linga at Gokarnam (Mahabaleswara) the northern edge of the land he reclaimed from the sea, and also consecrated the Durga (Bhagavathi) idol at Kanyakumari, the southern tip of the reclaimed land.

You will thus see that I do not write from any "pet belief/s" nor do I attempt to needle others. These are discussions and I strive to keep them as free of rancour and low level jokes, as is possible.

 

[renuka]

Dear Sangom ji,

As far as I know only the Brahmanda Purana speaks about Parashurama creating Kerala by throwing his axe in the sea..the Bhagavatha Purana does not say so.

I read before that the Brahmanda Purana was written after Nambhoodiris were already well settled in Kerala..so I wonder why its not in the Bhagavatha Purana? Could it be a latter addition or a later fabrication?

This fact I remember well becos one commentator of the Naranyaneeyam brings this to attention with regards to the land called Kerala being created by Parashurama remains controversial if it actually happened.

 

[Vaagmi]

Dear Shri Vaagmi Sir,

I am rather surprised that a Professor of your eminence, is so hasty and prone to "needling" your adversary unnecessarily. Such needling can be avoided, imho.

I quoted from the wiki page Parashurama - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. In that very same page, little down below, you will find the following section:—

"Beating back the Arabian Sea Lord Parashurama with Saraswat Brahmin settlers demanding Varuna make the seas recede to save the lands of Konkan and Kerala


Puranas write that the western coast of India was threatened by tumultuous waves and tempests, causing the land to be overcome by the sea. Parashurama fought back the advancing waters, demanding Varuna release the land of Konkan and Malabar. During their fight, Parashurama threw his axe into the sea. A mass of land rose up, but Varuna told him that because it was filled with salt, the land would be barren.[SUP][12][/SUP]
Parashurama then did a tapasya for Nagaraja, the King of Snakes. Parashurama asked him to spread serpents throughout the land so their venom would neutralize the salt filled earth. Nagaraja agreed, and a lush and fertile land grew. Thus, Parashurama pushed back the coastline between the foothills of the Western Ghats and the Arabian Sea, creating modern day Kerala.[SUP][12][/SUP]
The coastal area of Kerala, Konkan, Karnataka, Goa and Maharashtra, are today also known as Parashurama Kshetra or Land of Parashurama in homage.[SUP][13][/SUP] Puranas record that Parashurama placed statues of Shiva at 108 different locations throughout the reclaimed land, which still exist today.[SUP][14][/SUP][SUP][15][/SUP] Shiva, is the source of kundalini, and it around his neck that Nagaraja is coiled, and so the statues were in gratitude for their baneful cleansing of the land.[SUP][16][/SUP]

Then he took a winnowing basket, or Surpa, and threw it at the sea. The water retreated, and from the place the basket fell at Gokarna, land rose again. This land is called Kerala, or 'Siirparaka' (Brahmanda Purana, Chapters 98 and 99). It is also said that while beating back the sea, Parashurama fired an arrow from his mystical bow that landed in Goa at Benaulim, creating Salkache Tollem, or 'Lotus Lake'.[SUP][5][/SUP] "


The sentence in bold, blue font will show that I need not have gone to 'some other source' for the very common knowledge (handed down from generation to generation by word of mouth). I understand, besides, that the text "Keralolpatthi" in rather outdated Malayalam, which the Namboodiris hold as equal to scriptures (just as Vaishnavas seem to hold the itihaasas as scriptures, and not as works composed by humans) also states the same 108 Siva temples and 108 Bhagavathi (Durga) temples. In this url you will find the list of these 108 Shiva temples; permit me to say that old people - smaarthas - used to recite these lines after their morning bath, during my childhood.

The legend or traditional belief is that Parasurama installed the Siva Linga at Gokarnam (Mahabaleswara) the northern edge of the land he reclaimed from the sea, and also consecrated the Durga (Bhagavathi) idol at Kanyakumari, the southern tip of the reclaimed land.

You will thus see that I do not write from any "pet belief/s" nor do I attempt to needle others. These are discussions and I strive to keep them as free of rancour and low level jokes, as is possible.

Dear Sri Sangom Sir,

I had no intention to needle you. I am sorry if my post has left that kind of an impression in you. While you have quoted from one part of the page in wiki I have quoted from another part of the same wiki as follows:

[h=2]Parashurama Kshetras[/h]

Seven Kshetras are popularly known as Parashurama Kshetras or Parashurama Srishti:[SUP][5][/SUP]
1. Udupi
2. kukke Subramanya
3. Kumbasi
4. Koteshwara
5. Shankaranarayana
6. Kollur
7. Gokarna
[h=2]See also[edit][/h]
· Bhagavad Gita
· Chiranjivi
· End time
· Haihayas
· Heheya Kingdom
· Kalachuri Kingdom
· Parasuram Express
· Ramayana

So I am as much within my rights as you are. I have respect for you. There is no need for feeling otherwise.

 

[Vaagmi]

Dear Sangom ji,

As far as I know only the Brahmanda Purana speaks about Parashurama creating Kerala by throwing his axe in the sea..the Bhagavatha Purana does not say so.

I read before that the Brahmanda Purana was written after Nambhoodiris were already well settled in Kerala..so I wonder why its not in the Bhagavatha Purana? Could it be a latter addition or a later fabrication?

This fact I remember well becos one commentator of the Naranyaneeyam brings this to attention with regards to the land called Kerala being created by Parashurama remains controversial if it actually happened.

Brahmanda purana is one of the rajasa puranas.

 

[sangom]

Dear Sangom ji,

As far as I know only the Brahmanda Purana speaks about Parashurama creating Kerala by throwing his axe in the sea..the Bhagavatha Purana does not say so.

I read before that the Brahmanda Purana was written after Nambhoodiris were already well settled in Kerala..so I wonder why its not in the Bhagavatha Purana? Could it be a latter addition or a later fabrication?

This fact I remember well becos one commentator of the Naranyaneeyam brings this to attention with regards to the land called Kerala being created by Parashurama remains controversial if it actually happened.

You may kindly note that we now have a few Vaishnava members very, very active in propagating their faith with zeal, in this forum, and any mention that goes against their pet notions is likely to even get reported to the police and I may land in prison (while you may not; inshah Allah!).

Adishankara, in his prasthānatraya bhāṣyas quotes from 54 scriptural authorities including Vishnu Purana, Mahabharata (Shanti Parva, Vana Parva & Stree Parva) and Harivamsa but there is not even one quote from Srimadbhagavata. Some scholars therefore hold the view that either Srimadbhagavata did not exist during the time of Adishankara (8th.-9th. centuries CE), or that if it existed, it was not looked upon as an authoritative scriptural text.

Another, independent, opinion which I have read is that Srimadbhagavata was composed by Vopadeva, brother of Jayadeva of Ashtapadee fame. But Vopadeva has written a commentary named Muktaaphala on the Bhagavata, and so it looks rather unnecessary and implausible that he wrote both the purana and a commentary thereon.

It is my opinion that we cannot fix the date and authorship of any of these puranas with even a modicum of accuracy and that helps the believers to hold on to their pet notions like one Vyaasa compiled all these, etc. But, for me, all these Puranas are religious books/treatises compiled by scholars at different points of historical time (say the last 2000 years at best) and most of these have interpolations also done at various points of time in order to subserve some purpose or another.

Brahmaanda Purana is one such text and scholars say there are interpolations therein also. Just as is the case of the Puranas, we have no clear idea as to when the Namboodiris came and settled down in Kerala. They have preserved the vedas and scriptures with so much accuracy and effort that mention of just one or two words were enough for a Namboodiri vedic scholar to identify it and recite the whole hymn; but except their gotras the Namboodiris have not passed down any info. whatsoever about where they came from and when, etc.

 

[prasad1]

You may kindly note that we now have a few Vaishnava members very, very active in propagating their faith with zeal, in this forum, and any mention that goes against their pet notions is likely to even get reported to the police and I may land in prison (while you may not; inshah Allah!).

Adishankara, in his prasthānatraya bhāṣyas quotes from 54 scriptural authorities including Vishnu Purana, Mahabharata (Shanti Parva, Vana Parva & Stree Parva) and Harivamsa but there is not even one quote from Srimadbhagavata. Some scholars therefore hold the view that either Srimadbhagavata did not exist during the time of Adishankara (8th.-9th. centuries CE), or that if it existed, it was not looked upon as an authoritative scriptural text.

Another, independent, opinion which I have read is that Srimadbhagavata was composed by Vopadeva, brother of Jayadeva of Ashtapadee fame. But Vopadeva has written a commentary named Muktaaphala on the Bhagavata, and so it looks rather unnecessary and implausible that he wrote both the purana and a commentary thereon.

It is my opinion that we cannot fix the date and authorship of any of these puranas with even a modicum of accuracy and that helps the believers to hold on to their pet notions like one Vyaasa compiled all these, etc. But, for me, all these Puranas are religious books/treatises compiled by scholars at different points of historical time (say the last 2000 years at best) and most of these have interpolations also done at various points of time in order to subserve some purpose or another.

Brahmaanda Purana is one such text and scholars say there are interpolations therein also. Just as is the case of the Puranas, we have no clear idea as to when the Namboodiris came and settled down in Kerala. They have preserved the vedas and scriptures with so much accuracy and effort that mention of just one or two words were enough for a Namboodiri vedic scholar to identify it and recite the whole hymn; but except their gotras the Namboodiris have not passed down any info. whatsoever about where they came from and when, etc.

Sir, you are right, the shrillness of the opinions expresses their lack of proof. The entire purana and bhakti Path is rather sketchy in details. Lot of purana and bhakti marg may have evolved purely to counter the growing influence of Muslim religion. It seems the idea of a "god" in heaven listening to his begging devotees is foreign to Hinduism. It runs counter to the karma theory. Without this invented 'god' the common folks were not interested in religion at that time. Common folks were interested in getting something, so they had to create this 'god', call him Vishnu, Ganesh or any other name.
So it was a bribe for the masses.
With out knowing the origin and chronology of events it is very easy to cloud the facts.

 

[sangom]

Sir, you are right, the shrillness of the opinions expresses their lack of proof. The entire purana and bhakti Path is rather sketchy in details. Lot of purana and bhakti marg may have evolved purely to counter the growing influence of Muslim religion. It seems the idea of a "god" in heaven listening to his begging devotees is foreign to Hinduism. It runs counter to the karma theory. Without this invented 'god' the common folks were not interested in religion at that time. Common folks were interested in getting something, so they had to create this 'god', call him Vishnu, Ganesh or any other name.
So it was a bribe for the masses.
With out knowing the origin and chronology of events it is very easy to cloud the facts.

Shri Prasad Sir,

From whatever I have read so far, it appears that in the north, there were a number of belief systems or cults like the Aajivikas, the buddhists and the Jains (both major heretical groups with large following), the Vasudeva cult, etc. As time passed this Vasudeva cult transformed into a vasudeva-kesava cult and then it became the vasudeva-kesava-vishnu-narayana cult and the original solar deity Narayana was identified with vishnu who was then equated with the already existing vasudeva-kesava cult. The original vasudeva was reportedly a folk hero in real life who was adored by the masses whereas the vedic hinduism was only for the higher classes. In course of time, the Paancharaatra agama might have come into being during the Gupta empire (as you said in one of your posts, hinduism got a revival during the Gupta times) which was more leaning towards the vishnu worship side. Thus, as regards North India, we have many books giving some information about the growth of vaishnavism there.

But in regard to south India, not much of studies are available, like for the north. But it appears as though there was an indigenous system of worshipping a deity called maayOn or maal by the masses here in the ancient Tamil country and in course of time, with growing contacts between the north and the south (even Harappan scripts have been found in archaeological potsherds from near Salem area) this local worship system - which was one like murugu, viRali, etc., this maayon became vishnu-narayana-kesava-krishna, all of these being sanskrit names and not Tamil names like maayOn/maal. The fact that some of the Azhwars belonged to the non-brahmin castes, lends support to the possibility that Vaishnavism in the south was not a brahmin-belief system to start with, but one which became part of the brahminical possessions after the time of Ramanuja and his propounding the Visishtadvaita philosophy. I feel lot of further scholarly research is needed to bring out the clear history of the origin and growth of the vaishnava cult in south India.

 

[கால பைரவன்]

I think that the "polytheistic" faith failed to unite its followers against a "monotheistic" invasion... It is but a character!

Dear Biswaji and auh ji,



It is a character alright, but don't you think increasingly this character is becoming a significant weakness?


You may be aware of the recent supreme court ban on exporting cattle from India for the Gandhimai Sacrifice. This practice has been followed by rural/tribal hindus for centuries but armed with a slew of animal right activists/ secular NGOs/ and activist judges, the state is able to impose this ban. This follows close in heels with ban on jallikattu, restrictions on nag panchami, dahi handi etc. Almost all of these festivals are linked to religious beliefs of various people who come under the hindu umbrella.


These very same activists normally don't bat an eyelid on animal slaughter by people belonging to other religions, bakrid for example. Therefore, the monotheistic faiths are able to protect their rights/culture/tradition etc much better than the polytheistic faith.



Of course, in the case of Hinduism these army of activists who are going after one hindu custom after another often claim to be hindu themselves. (there is a neat symmetry to this to what happens in this forum too.) They are the agnostic/atheist/secular hindus and are probably inspired by the Buddhist/jain religion. We get to hear that this has been happening for several centuries from the times of Buddha/mahavira/carvaka etc.


The polytheistic faith cannot survive the attack of a secular state and seculars, unless the component members of the polytheistic faith align themselves with a monotheistic faith. So the polytheistic faith may or may not be glorious, it will find it difficult to thrive.

 

[Naina_Marbus]

Dear Biswaji and auh ji,
..............................

The polytheistic faith cannot survive the attack of a secular state and seculars, unless the component members of the polytheistic faith align themselves with a monotheistic faith. So the polytheistic faith may or may not be glorious, it will find it difficult to thrive.

The polytheistic faith need not fear a secular state nor the seculars, because the Hindu ethos is intrinsically secular. If the faith can survive the onslaught of the malevalent mughals, these seculars are just fleabite.

It is not necessary to align with monotheistic faith. Just copy the most distinguishing aspect of the monotheistic faiths: proselytization.. This is the best way to immunize the faith against onslaughts.

In this context, I am reminded of the Realpolitik that US President Roosevelt adopted: Roosevelt adopted a foreign policy which was described as Big Stick policy : "speak softly, and carry a big stick."Roosevelt described his style of foreign policy as "the exercise of intelligent forethought and of decisive action sufficiently far in advance of any likely crisis".

 

[sarang]

and listen to swami vivekananda and swamy chinmayananda. bring back all who left.

The polytheistic faith need not fear a secular state nor the seculars, because the Hindu ethos is intrinsically secular. If the faith can survive the onslaught of the malevalent mughals, these seculars are just fleabite.

It is not necessary to align with monotheistic faith. Just copy the most distinguishing aspect of the monotheistic faiths: proselytization.. This is the best way to immunize the faith against onslaughts.

In this context, I am reminded of the Realpolitik that US President Roosevelt adopted: Roosevelt adopted a foreign policy which was described as Big Stick policy : "speak softly, and carry a big stick."Roosevelt described his style of foreign policy as "the exercise of intelligent forethought and of decisive action sufficiently far in advance of any likely crisis".

 

[sarang]

before venturing into dating, one should bear in mind that bharatavrsha has an undatable oral tradition. so commuting a work to manuscript does not point to a time slot. many works referred by the authors including manu and chanakya are not available. whether sankara made any reference ti srimad bhagavadam in his bhashya needs checking, it is a puerile argument to say that because he did not mention it, bhagavatam did not exist. nobody will buy this argument. azhwars have known, studied and used srimad bhagavatam.

 

[sangom]

I feel the polytheism of the hindu religion helped it to become the umbrella religion for the entire sub-continent, in the historical past. The very many cults, local belief systems, faiths and the various divinities associated with all these multifarious belief systems were left rather untouched, and, wherever possible, brought under that great umbrella by incorporating these into the mainstream religion; the ayyappa worship is probably one such example.

Reforms to this whole umbrella of faiths had been going on right from the ancient times. The role of Buddha, Mahavira, the Charvakas, Adishankara establishing the "Shanmata" by eliminating the barbaric and inhuman practices in those violent belief systems, the reforms brought about by anglicized people like Raja Ram Mohun Roy, the Arya Samaj, etc., have not weakened this grand umbrella religion but have only strengthened it over time, I will say.

Regarding Bakrid and the killing of animals for that festival also, there have been strict orders in most parts of the country against "illegal slaughter" of animals and individuals & organizations have also spearheaded movements/action against such "illegal slaughter". As regards 'legal slaughter' of animals throughout the country for food purposes, may be it will be possible to stop this completely only if the vegetarians all over India unite as one man and launch a spirited fight unto death for that cause. But there is a pertinent question : if all non-vegetarianism is ended, what will happen to vegetable prices? This deserves some attention, I feel.

Polytheism or Monotheism, humans - at least the vast majority of them - require some consolation as each one comes closer and closer to death, the inevitable, the inescapable and enigmatic end beyond which humanity has possibly not been able to see. Humans cannot accept a sudden and complete destruction of their entire personality, their hopes, dreams, plans, etc., on death; so, the human mind - rather childishly, weaves a web of hopes, dreams etc., and tries to convince itself, through a life-long effort, that there will be something beyond and after death, for itself as also for its associates. Religion serves this effort very ideally.

To the extent religions serve Man as a device for weaving his after-life dreams, a polytheistic religion may provide many choices whereas a strictly monotheistic belief system creates regimentation. But if we view from the Nature's grand scheme of things, all these are meaningless. That was why Gaudapada declares in his Mandukya Kaarikaa,

न निरोधो न चोत्पत्तिर्न बद्धो न च साधक:।
न मुमुक्षर्न वै मुक्त इत्येषा परमार्थता॥

na nirodho na cotpattirna baddho na ca sādhaka:|
na mumukṣarna vai mukta ityeṣā paramārthatā||

(There is neither dissolution, nor birth; neither anyone in bondage, nor any aspirant for wisdom; neither can there be anyone who hankers after liberation, nor any liberated as such. This alone is the Supreme Truth.)

 

[Vaagmi]

Dear Respected Sri Sangom Sir,

This has reference to your post addressed to Renukaji:

You may kindly note that we now have a few Vaishnava members very, very active in propagating their faith with zeal, in this forum, and any mention that goes against their pet notions is likely to even get reported to the police and I may land in prison (while you may not; inshah Allah!).

Dont worry sir, the crowd here won't allow that and will go for a saalai mariyal poraattam immediately.

There are two ways to attack an adversary. One is direct. It involves crying out loud the war cry and going straight and attacking. It usually leaves just a victor and a vanquished. The other is guerilla type. It involves a surreptitious attack. It involves first assuming a crybaby's position, crying aloud that the enemy is trying to propagate and overwhelm, that he is a zealot with an agenda to wipe out the entire community, that he will convert everyone overnight with his pet notions which are highly harmful and so......The message is left at that to be completed by the crowd. My malayali friends used to call it the method of a group which came and settled in Kerala.

I, a vaishnava member here, am least bothered about which faith is followed by whom. I do not propagate my faith. It does not need that kind of service. I will explain what is my faith whenever ill informed mediocrity comes here to eloquently point out perceived flaws in my faith. I only wish every one to follow his/her faith without indulging in mudslinging mischief. Period.

Sangom Sirji, you complained about needling and you are now indulging in the same game with a multiplier effect. If you care to go back and read all the posts by the so called "very active" vaishnava members here you will find one thing in common. They are all in response to needling like: immature Vaishnavites never go to a Siv temple whereas the 'enlightened' other brahmins go to all temples; they never name their children with names of Siva etc., while the "e" brahmins name their children with all kind of names; they keep fighting for U and Y marks while "e" brahmins never fight for any such thing; they eat puliyotharai while e-brahmins eat mothakam; their religion began with Ramanuja many years after the great teachers like Sankara, (Christ and Prophet Mohamed included) who taught us universal consciousness in which we always stay happily while these vaishnavites wallow in the material world etc.,and many more. Hope you won't attempt to do a hatchet-man's job for my writing this. That is: Insha Allah!!

Adishankara, in his prasthānatraya bhāṣyas quotes from 54 scriptural authorities including Vishnu Purana, Mahabharata (Shanti Parva, Vana Parva & Stree Parva) and Harivamsa but there is not even one quote from Srimadbhagavata. Some scholars therefore hold the view that either Srimadbhagavata did not exist during the time of Adishankara (8th.-9th. centuries CE), or that if it existed, it was not looked upon as an authoritative scriptural text.

Sankara did not quote from many other puranas also which were there in his time. That does not make their relevance any less and that does not make those puranas' arrivals later to Sankara's time. The logic of these scholars is flawed.

It is my opinion that we cannot fix the date and authorship of any of these puranas with even a modicum of accuracy and that helps the believers to hold on to their pet notions like one Vyaasa compiled all these, etc. But, for me, all these Puranas are religious books/treatises compiled by scholars at different points of historical time (say the last 2000 years at best) and most of these have interpolations also done at various points of time in order to subserve some purpose or another.

Well said truth. That is why we follow the method of classifying these puranas into Rajasic, Tamasic and Satvik categories. Take the six Satvik puranas as authoritative, Rajasic and tamasic less authoritative and move ahead with the enquiry into truth as otherwise we will be wasting time in digressions.

Brahmaanda Purana is one such text and scholars say there are interpolations therein also.

Elders have classified this purana as a rajasa purana for these reasons and more.

 

[Vaagmi]

Dear respected sri sangom Sir,

your post #115 for reference:

I feel lot of further scholarly research is needed to bring out the clear history of the origin and growth of the vaishnava cult in south India.

A lot of work has already been done on both the cults-the smarthaism and the vaishnavam. It needs only to be read and understood.

 

[sarang]

You may kindly note that we now have a few Vaishnava members very, very active in propagating their faith with zeal, in this forum, and any mention that goes against their pet notions is likely to even get reported to the police and I may land in prison (while you may not; inshah Allah!).

Perfect evangelist of the abrahamic kind. abuse native faith, call their gods as false gods, make obnoxious remarks on scriptures, adherents and practices, and try to polarize discussions. why not speak about the merits and virtues of the adopted faith and defend its 'holiness'. afasik and in my opinion statements are fine as long as they are neutral and do not degrade sanatana dharma.

 

[sangom]

< Clipped - extraneous to the topic under discussion >

Sangom Sirji, you complained about needling and you are now indulging in the same game with a multiplier effect. If you care to go back and read all the posts by the so called "very active" vaishnava members here you will find one thing in common. They are all in response to needling like: immature Vaishnavites never go to a Siv temple whereas the 'enlightened' other brahmins go to all temples; they never name their children with names of Siva etc., while the "e" brahmins name their children with all kind of names; they keep fighting for U and Y marks while "e" brahmins never fight for any such thing; they eat puliyotharai while e-brahmins eat mothakam; their religion began with Ramanuja many years after the great teachers like Sankara, (Christ and Prophet Mohamed included) who taught us universal consciousness in which we always stay happily while these vaishnavites wallow in the material world etc.,and many more. Hope you won't attempt to do a hatchet-man's job for my writing this. That is: Insha Allah!!

Dear Shri Vaagmi,

I was referring to your usages like mosquito/Parasurama coming in the night and telling things etc., as "needling". May be some of what I have written, appears to you as "needling"; if you point out I will definitely avoid repetition. Again, I did not intend to include you in the "very active" group and I know that you know it well!

Here again, I think there is a tendency to exaggerate, by using adjectives like immature, 'enlightened', "e", etc. Bereft of these and inaccuracies like Christ and Mohammed teaching universal consciousness, I agree with the gist of what you write. But you may also be knowing well enough that items like naming children, eating modakam, etc., did not actually figure in the discussions; at least that is my memory.

As regards Vaishnavam becoming a major section of Brahmanas, I think it is correct to say that it happened only after Ramanuja and his giving shape to the visishtadvaita philosophy in contradiction to Advaita. To that extent, it will not be incorrect, within this Tamil Brahmins' forum to have the view that Ramanuja is a reference point as regards Vaishnava Brahmins.

Sankara did not quote from many other puranas also which were there in his time. That does not make their relevance any less and that does not make those puranas' arrivals later to Sankara's time. The logic of these scholars is flawed.

Sankara has quoted from vishnupurana and a second purana which ha has not named. Hence I think only Vishnu Purana is to be considered authoritative; the other purana is yet to be identified. The remaining puranas might not have attained popularity and authority during Sankara's times, is my view, because most of the Puranas were compiled during the Gupta dynasty's time, as per scholars.

Well said truth. That is why we follow the method of classifying these puranas into Rajasic, Tamasic and Satvik categories. Take the six Satvik puranas as authoritative, Rajasic and tamasic less authoritative and move ahead with the enquiry into truth as otherwise we will be wasting time in digressions.

I have understood that the classification under Satvik, Rajasic and Thamasic is done according to the portrayal of the central deity (godhead) of each purana; their authoritativeness has nothing to do with this classification.

 

[sangom]

Dear respected sri sangom Sir,

your post #115 for reference:



A lot of work has already been done on both the cults-the smarthaism and the vaishnavam. It needs only to be read and understood.

Dear Shri Vaaagmi sir,

Vaishnava authors writing about vaishnavism will be as good or as bad as smarthas writing about Saivism. If there are works by neutral (impartial) authors/scholars, preferably Indian, please write the particulars.