aagama-s and temple construction

[Guest guest]

Sri.S.Parthasarathy in his post observes that many

temples being newly built in present-day India do not

conform to the rules of aagamA.

 

This is true to some extent.

 

Sir, just as an interesting aside (and not in defense

of taking license with the aagama), I ask you if you

knew that many aagama experts say that the main idol

("moolavar") of Lord Venkateshwara ("svayambhu")

defies all aagamic canons?!

 

dAsan,

Sampathkumaran

 

 

Talk to your friends online with Messenger.

http://im.

[Guest guest]

sampath kumar writes:

> Sir, just as an interesting aside (and not in defense

> of taking license with the aagama), I ask you if you

> knew that many aagama experts say that the main idol

> ("moolavar") of Lord Venkateshwara ("svayambhu")

> defies all aagamic canons?!

 

Perhaps some agama experts say this, but S.K. Ramachandra Rao,

one of the great iconographical experts of modern times,

argues in his book "The Hill-Shrine of Vengadam" that the

Tirupati idol indeed complies with descriptions of possible

images contained in the older Vaikhanasa texts. I believe

he cites Atri or Bhrigu Samhita.

 

By the way, for anyone interested in the history of Tirupati,

I strongly urge this book. It is outstanding:

 

The hill-shrine of Vengadam :

art, architecture, and notagama of Tirumala temple

by S.K. Ramachandra Rao.

1st ed.

Bangalore : Kalpatharu Research Academy, 1993.

 

It is available at most good Indological booksellers in India.

 

Mani

[Guest guest]

--- Mani Varadarajan <mani

wrote:

> By the way, for anyone interested in the history of

> Tirupati,

> I strongly urge this book. It is outstanding:

>

> The hill-shrine of Vengadam :

> art, architecture, and notagama of

> Tirumala temple

> by S.K. Ramachandra Rao.

> 1st ed.

> Bangalore : Kalpatharu Research Academy,

> 1993.

>

> It is available at most good Indological booksellers

> in India.

>

> Mani

>

 

Friends,

 

Here is another excellent book on all aspects of the

Tirupati temple published by the TTD:

 

"The Tirumala Temple"

By N.Ramesam

 

Published by the TTD (1979)

605 pages

 

In this book many interesting features of aagama are

also dealt with in a simple way.

 

Recommended reading for anyone who wishes to know more

about the history and legend of the temple of Lord

tiruvEngadamudaiyAn.

 

dAsan,

Sampathkumaran

 

 

Talk to your friends online with Messenger.

http://im.

[Guest guest]

--- Mani Varadarajan <mani

wrote:

> Perhaps some agama experts say this, but S.K.

> Ramachandra Rao,> one of the great iconographical

experts of modern> times,> argues in his book "The

Hill-Shrine of Vengadam"> that the> Tirupati idol

indeed complies with descriptions of> possible

> images contained in the older Vaikhanasa texts. I

> believe> he cites Atri or Bhrigu Samhita.

 

Mani and other friends,

 

I have not heard of Sri.Rao's book but my information

comes from Sri.N.Ramesam's excellent book "The

Tirumala Temple" published by the TTD(1979).

Sri.Ramesam was one time Chairman of the

Tirumala-Tirupati Devasthanam.

 

In the above book, giving graphic iconographic details

of the "moolavar", Sri.Ramesam first catalogues in the

form of a check-list all the characteristics of a

Vishnu idol laid down in the "mArichasamhita" of the

VaikhAnasa-agama. Then he tries to fit the actual

features of the idol with the check-list. He then does

the same with another check-list of features laid down

in the "bhrighu-samhita".

 

With the "brighu-samhita" the author says:

Quote:

"The 33rd adhyAya of the brighu-samhita shows that

Vishnu has 4 hands invested with 5 weapons or

aayudhA-s; the 2 halves of the body are symmetrical

and beautifully shaped; that he wears all the

divya-aabharanA-s; SriDevi ever abides in his form and

that he is full of kalyana-gunA-s and wanting in none

and he shines with his 6 gunA-s (shadguna).

 

"But this description is not a detailed one for

Venkateshwara. The divya-aayudhA-s, not all the

weapons are in SriVenkaeshwara's hands."

(Unquote)

 

After similar and careful iterative process (4 full

pages) of matching the features of actual idol, one by

one, with other aagama specs (like those of the

"maricha-samhita")the author finally concludes:

 

(quote):

"From a detailed examination of the aagamic rules, (we

see that) the idol of the Lord does NOT correspond to

them. One can therefore only come to any one of the

following two conclusions:

 

(1) The idol of Lord Venkateshwara was conceived and

executed at a time before the aagamA-s were codified

and came into being; or

 

(2) The idol is a class by itself and from the

earliest days has been so conceived and made by the

sculptor as to drive home the point that the Lord is

self-manifest or "svayambhu"."

(unquote)

 

Very, very interesting passage!

 

It also leads one to wonder why the author says that

the aagama-s were "codified". It leads one to believe

that perhaps the aagamA is the "codified" form or

derivative of something else that preceded it in

time....

 

Now, could that "something else" not have been

"portions" of some hoary Vedic "samhita-s" long lost

to posterity but later reclaimed to be "codified" into

'aagama'?

 

Just a (wild!) thought.

dAsan,

Sampathkumaran

 

 

Talk to your friends online with Messenger.

http://im.

[Guest guest]

Friends,

 

In my previous post on the subject I seem to have

spelt "marichi-samhita" as 'mAricha-samhita". This is

wrong and adiyen is very sorry.

 

The 'samhita' in question is related to Sage Marichi

and should not be mistaken with any other 'maricha-s'

in our literature.... and least of all with the

'rAkshasa' 'mArichan' of the Ramayana fame!

 

Just thought I'd clarify so there won't be needless

confusion.

 

Thanks,

Regards,

dAsan,

Sampathkumaran

 

 

 

Talk to your friends online with Messenger.

http://im.