(no subject)

[Guest guest]

Namaste Vamadeva,

 

On the subject of Image-worship, it seems interesting that early

Theravadhan Schools rejected Idols and iconography of the Buddha, which

suggest a pre-Buddhist Vedic origin.

 

Many scholars have been quick to point out how Hinduism and Buddhism are

riddled with "Deities" or "Idols", however it did not come from India.

 

The Indo-Greek Kingdoms of Gandhara blended Hinduism and Buddhism with

elements of the Greek religions, however all Greeks either became

devotees of Krishna or Buddhists.

 

The idea of Image-worship in Buddhism is NOT an Indian invention but a

Greaco-Roman one

that was introduced into India and evolved in two ways as Gandhara in

W.India and Mathuran in E. and Middle-India.

 

Similarly, before 200BCE we see no iconography of Hindu Gods such as

Krishna or Vishnu either showing that Hindus were more Yogic and Tantric

than they were image-worshippers.

 

True, Indus sites yeild Sculptures - however these seem more

Iconographic than actually items of

worship, rather they were Dhyana-Murthis.

 

If Hinduism origanally included full-scale Idol-worship, then where are

the remains of Elaborate Temples and

Devatas prior to the Greek arrival in India?

 

Rather the Indians relied more on Homas, Pujas, they did have Holy

Places (Tirthas) but they would hev just been reminders not Large-Scale

temples.

 

Hindus were origanally clean-living City-Dwellers in Planned-Cities,

Merchants with Huge Palaces

who performed their religious Actitives such as Ashwamedha etc. in

Opulent Scales, however Outdoors or at Holy-Places (without temples).

 

To also prove this we note *most Indus-Sculptures to a high-degree

wereRishis or Priests not merely the Gods

who were represented only in iconographic forms.

Hence the Statues of the Rishis would have served as Remnants of the

Guru like the present-day than objects of worship.

(Rg-Vedic refernces to such images would relate to Toys or Images for

Dhyana again or Public Statues for ornamentation lie the Statue of

Liberty for Example).

 

Once again, I am not an iconoclast, but I am just relayng the Tradition

as Archeology and History shows it as.

 

My point is mainly that few-people worshipped Idols, the one's that did

were merely Tribals, lower-castes or

used them for Meditation Images (like Pictures or Yantras).

 

Large-scale Temples and worship in Hinduism only came in via the

Bhakti-Traditions from 400BCE onwards in India and possibly from some

minor Christian influences from Rome which retained contacts with India

until the present day through trade of exotic Spices and Ivory.

 

Possibly if Vedic People did worship in such Large scales, then these

Temples would have been OUT of India itself (which was a culture that

retained purity through Yoga and non-Materialism) and existed at Egypt

and the Americas which served as International Vedic Bases.

 

Brighus were possibly Image-worshippers as they relate to Dualism and

Bhakti whereas

the Angirasas being Shaivite and Non-Material Sadhus like today would

have not cared for such

practices like Shiva himself represents.

(Possibly this is why Hebrews saw "Venus devotees" as "Evil Idol

worshippers" origanally as well).

 

We must remember that in Vedic India, most people were Rishis and

dwelled in Farming Cultures (like today's Sindh) and Caves / simple

Ashramas in the

Himalayas (like today's Shaiva-Yogis and Tibetans) and lead a simple

life based on Prayer, Meditation and Godhead

not concerned with outer or Material Concerns. This is why India was the

source of the World's Religions and Seers which is also why she was the

Mother of Civilisation through the Rishi-Vidya.

 

 

Aum Brahmajyothiye Namah!

 

 

-Rodney