prithvi Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 One of the most puzzling things that historians keep telling us is that Vaishnavites, the IE speaking people, came from out side of <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" /><st1:country-region w:st="on">India</st1:country-region> about 1500 BC and that Saivites, the Dravidians, are the original inhabitants of <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">India</st1:place></st1:country-region>. Indians keep arguing that there was never such migration/invasion by Vaishnavite Aryans; but they have nevertheless accepted it as a fact that Saivism, as a religion, is much older than Vaishnavism. Nothing can be farther than truth. Vaishnavism is the older religion of the two, and Saivism came in much recently. Most ancient Siva and Shakti shrines of <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">India</st1:place></st1:country-region> exhibit characteristics of having been Vaishnavite shrines converted into Saivism at not too distant past in Indian history. There was a mighty drought of 300 hundred years around 2200 BC. Most Vaishnavites left <st1:country-region w:st="on">India</st1:country-region> at that time and settled in <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region> and <st1:place w:st="on">Europe</st1:place> . Their God Yahweh/Allah is none other than <st1:place w:st="on">Krishna</st1:place> . Because of the suffering of drought, the remaining Vaishnavites in <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">India</st1:place></st1:country-region> lost faith in God and converted to Buddhism and Jainism. Because of these developments, Vaishnavism almost became extinct in <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">India</st1:place></st1:country-region> at that time. Dravidian Saivites, who were living in Gujarat, likewise, got displaced by the drought and came towards <st1:place w:st="on">South India</st1:place> converting and adapting to a number of Vishnu and Laxmi shrines on their way. They traveled through <st1:place w:st="on">Maharashtra</st1:place> , Karnataka, Telangana to Tamilnadu. Along with <st1:place w:st="on">Gujarat</st1:place> , these five regions came to be called as Pancha Dravidas because of this. I have written a book titled “19000 YEARS OF WORLD HISTORY: The Story of Religion.” The book, of 1000 pages, a product of several years of intense research, has gone into production and would be published in a couple of months. Given some important findings of the book, I would be interested in getting feedback from esteemed people before giving the final shape. The following is an extract from the book that shows that most Mother Goddess shrines were once Vaishnavite, converted into Saivism. I have posted a few more excerpts/chapters at a blog 19000years.blogspot.com (Mods, if you feel that I should not give this link here, please remove the link); I would be greatful if you can provide me with your feedback, and I would interested in having discussion in this regard. The findings will not be liked by some, but please take it in a mature way - if we do not write that muslims invaded <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">India</st1:place></st1:country-region>, we can never write any Indian history. When Buddhism became extinct, several Buddhist shrines were likewise converted into Vaishnavism. I have come across claims that famous Vaishnavite shrines like Titupati and Puri were once Buddhist. So the objective of the following discussion is only to objectively establish history and not to show any sect in good or bad light. If we are not courageous enough to look at history in a mature way, true history would never come out. Kindly provide your feedback to prithvirajr@ymail.com or prithvi.book@gmail.com. (Extract from the book below. It is part of the book, so some sentences might refer to other chapters in the book. Kindly ignore those references) Now let me talk about Shakti temples. As we know, the Mother Goddess worship is considered to belong to Saivism with each and every lady divinity being considered as a manifestation of Siva’s wife Parvati. I have already shown that Mother Goddess worship originally belonged to Vaishnavites. Now let me take the reader through the various ancient Mother Goddess shrines of <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">India</st1:place></st1:country-region>. I shall show that most ancient Mother Goddess shrine of <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">India</st1:place></st1:country-region> was originally Vaishnavite mother Goddess shrines, converted into Saivite Mother Goddess shrines in the recent past in history. There is such huge amount of information available here that it can be clearly deduced that is not Vaishnavite Aryans who invaded/migrated <st1:country-region w:st="on">India</st1:country-region> but it is Saivite Dravidians who invaded/migrated <st1:country-region w:st="on">India</st1:country-region> while Vaishnavite Aryans were already present in <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">India</st1:place></st1:country-region>. The findings of this chapter alone would tell us as to how carelessly Indian as well as World history has been dealt with by historians who were bent on proving that Indian culture and history was just a by-product of some external invasion. The findings of this chapter alone would require us to re-write current day history completely. And that is exactly what we have been doing throughout this Book. Kindly note that when I talk about shrines here, I am not talking about the huge structures that we see today. I do not mean to say that a huge Vaishnavite shrine existed and that it was converted. When I talk about a shrine here, I am not talking about any physical structures. A particular spot on earth is revered for some reason because of some incident that occurred in the past and that spot becomes holy irrespective of how big the shrine at the spot is. In course of time, at most of these places that are revered, huge structures have come up. However when I say that an conversion of a shrine has taken place, I mean that the holy spot of the shrine has been taken over. The shrine at that place could have been much smaller than the current one and chances are that, after the holy spots had been taken over, huge physical structures of the other sect have been erected there. Vaishno Devi The most important and the most famous Mother Goddess shrine in the whole of the subcontinent is the Vaishno Devi temple in <st1:State w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Jammu and Kashmir</st1:place></st1:State>. It is considered to be the quintessential Mother Goddess shrine that captivates the imagination of the devotee and brings him or her, everlasting bliss and sheer happiness. Vaishno Devi or Vaishnavi is, today, primarily worshiped as a manifestation of Durga, the wife of Siva. There is a Siva Linga installed adjacent to the sanctum, leaving us with no doubt as to which sect the temple belongs to. The very name, Vaishnavi, means female form of Vishnu, female power of Vishnu, or in sadgunic form, Vaishnavi can be considered to mean Vishnu’s wife. And yet, she is being currently worshiped as Siva’s wife! The most important legend of this temple corroborates the statement that the deity is Vishnu’s wife. The following is a Wikipedia extract of the legend of the Mother Goddess of the shrine. According to Hindu epic, Ma Vaishno Devi took birth in the South of India in the home of Ratnakar Sagar. Her worldly parents had remained childless for a long time. Ratnakar had promised, the night before the birth of the Divine child, that he would not come in the way of whatever his child desired. Ma Vaishno Devi was called Trikuta as a child. Later She was called Vaishnavi because of Her taking birth from Lord Vishnu's lineage. When Trikuta was 9 years old, She sought her father's permission for doing penance on the sea-shore. Trikuta prayed to Lord Vishnu in the form of Ram. During Shree Ram's search for Sita, He reached the sea-shore along with His army. His eyes fell on this Divine Girl in deep meditation. Trikuta told Shree Ram that She had accepted Him as Her husband. Shree Ram told Her that during this Incarnation He had vowed to be faithful to only Sita. However the Lord assured Her that in Kaliyuga He would manifest as Kalki and would marry Her. In the meantime, Shree Ram asked Trikuta to meditate in the cave found in the Trikuta Range of Manik Mountains, situated in <st1:place w:st="on">Northern India</st1:place>. Ma decided to observe the 'Navratra' for the Victory of Shree Ram against Ravan. Hence one reads the Ramayan during the 9 days of Navratra, in remembrance of the above connection. Shree Ram promised that the whole world would sing Ma Vaishno Devi's praise. Trikuta was to become famous as Vaishno Devi and would become immortal forever. Anything about Siva in the legend? Nothing. It is a Vaishnavite shrine, and the Mother Goddess there, as per beliefs, is someone who has taken an earthly abode and is doing penance for the betterment of humanity. She is waiting to become one with Vishnu/Ram at the end of Kali Yuga, and it is by virtue of her divine Lila that she stays on earth so that she can bless the devotees. She is essentially the power of Vishnu, or in sadgunic terms, the wife of Vishnu. Here is an extract of the arati that is read out everyday in the temple, in praise of the Goddess1. The worship starts with the worship of Vishnu, Laxmi, and Surya (We know that Surya or Sun God has been integrated into Vedic religion as a manifestation of Vishnu) – Whoever contemplates upon Vishnu gets automatically purified, both mentally and physically. This is followed by ‘Achman’ (drinking of holy water after accepting it in the palm of the hand), which helps to wash off the sins committed by action, thought, and speech. I bow to thee Keshav, I bow to thee Narayan, I bow to thee Madhav, I bow to thee Govind. This is followed by the chanting of the following mantra to welcome Laxmi and applying Tilak (or an auspicious mark) on the forehead of the Pujaris. Laxmi, the omnipotent giver of prosperity, I respectfully welcome you to my home.In the next mantra, the Pujaris pray to the Goddess for granting them sound and robust health by chanting the following mantras: Oh Mother, keep my heart, speech, breathing, sight, hearing, strength, and energy intact and disease free. After this the earth is worshiped by chanting the following mantras: In These mantras the earth is worshiped in order to purify the place for sitting. Oh Mother earth, just as you hold the earth and Vishnu holds you. I beseech you to hold me and accept this seat that I am offering you. Thereafter an Argha (water containing a mixture of milk, rice, grass etc.) is offered to Surya Devta (Sun God) with the chanting the following mantras: Oh Sun, master of the brilliant effulgence, please accept this Argha that I am offering with complete devotion. After a few more of the above verses, the Purusha Sukta is then read out, and we by now know that Purusha Sukta belonged to Vaishnavites. And quite incidentally, in one of the verses of the arati, it is Laxmi who is praised to be the destroyer of demon Mahisha, which goes against the current beliefs that it is Saivite Goddess Parvati who is the killer of Mahisha. I pray to Mata Maha Laxmi who destroyed Mahishasur. She is seated on a lotus flower and carries a rosary, a rope, a disc, a mace, a conch shell, a bell, a container for drinking honey, and a shield. Incidentally, Siva is completely conspicuous by absence in at least the copy of the arati that I possess. He is at one place mentioned as Rudra along with several other Gods. Other than that, there is hardly any reference to him. The text has been modified to some extent to show some linkages to Siva’s wife Parvati and to Siva’s son Ganesh. So in the latter part of the arati, there are references to Saivite Durga. But I think the shrine has nothing to do with Durga or Saivism; these references are all later additions. At this stage, the reader might ask as to why the intruders did not include the name of Siva in the arati? If the arati was modified, they could also have modified it to show connection to Siva? The answer to this question is that the intruders can only take over the temple, they cannot make the people worship the deity of the temple, right? If a Vaishnavite shrine in a Vaishnavite area is captured and the deity is converted into a Saivite deity, the people living in the temple area would simply stop coming to the temple. The temple would go to ruins, and the very objective of converting the temple into a Saivite shrine bites the dust. Therefore, changes have to be done in a gradual manner. Moreover, the changes have to be done all over <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">India</st1:place></st1:country-region>. They cannot use force wherever they go; that would not be possible. The best course of action is to integrate their new religion on top of the existing Vaishnavism, rather than to displace it completely. Make changes that take effect gradually, keep Vishnu’s name, but convert the shrine into a Saivite one. On the face of it, it looks like the integration of an external religion, and it looks fair enough – “they want to worship their Goddess as well, as one of the manifestations of the Goddess of the shrine, so what is wrong?” goes the argument. And then after a few decades, install a Siva Linga there and make the change a relatively permanent one. Actually, this is not an invasion, it is an adaptation. Kaila Devi We next stop at Kaila Devi in Rajasthan. Goddess Kaila Devi, or popularly called Mahalaxmi, is the reigning deity of millions across the states of Eastern Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, and Madhya Pradesh, in the northern hemisphere of India. She is the tutelary deity of the erstwhile princely Jadaun Rajput rulers of the ersthile princely state of Karauli, now a part of the state of Rajasthan2. The origin of this deity has been lost in time, and she is considered as the kul devi or the guardian deity by Yadavas, Kinchis, and the princes of Karauli. The temple holds the imagination of the shakta sect in the north. A ritual called Kanak Dhauti is observed by staunch devotees. They cover a distance of 15 to 20 kilometers not by foot, but by lying prostrate and making lines with their hands in that position, advancing up to the line drawn, and repeating this procedure till they reach the temple! As per the estimates given by most sources, the temple attracts about six million devotes a year! I am not sure as to why this is temple is not given as much prominence and publicity as Vaishno Devi because, as per my understanding, the number of pilgrims to Vaishno Devi does not exceed this figure, but, in fact, might fall short of this figure. If these figures are true, then this might even be the most venerated Mother Goddess shrine of the subcontinent. I just have a hunch that this might be the place of origin of all the Mother Goddess legends and cults that we see today in the subcontinent. The extent of veneration seen definitely fits the bill. And the cult itself, which we read in Devi Mahatmya, talks about two main protagonists – Chandika and Chamunda. To be sure, this shrine at the Kaila village of the Karauli district of Rajasthan definitely has two idols. The idol in the front has a slightly bent neck and the idol at the back looks sideways. The front idol is that of Mahalaxmi, and the one looking sideways belongs to Chamunda. The temple is called Kaila Devi temple. The main Goddess looking straight at the devotee is of course Mahalaxmi, and we can therefore think that Kaila Devi obviously refers to Mahalaxmi. However, I am slightly uncomfortable. There are two deities and three names. Two deities are Laxmi and Chamunda. And three names are Mahalaxmi, Chamunda, and Kaila Devi. Most of the current day scribes who cover these Mother Goddess shrines are normally inclined towards describing anything in feminine form as wife of Siva. Therefore, they would be inclined to describe this deity as the incarnation of Durga, or they would be ready to describe the deity as Goddess of Wealth – she is not supreme deity, just Goddess of Wealth Mahalaxmi – is the sort of a refrain. But she is anything but the Goddess of Wealth. She is the reigning deity or kul devi of millions, and I do not expect people to prostrate and roll for 15 to 20 kilometers for some Goddess who is just a Goddess of wealth. No. Everything around the temple points us towards the temple being the origin of Chandika/Chamunda cult, the cult that is at the center of all Mother Goddess worship on the subcontinent. Kaila Devi quite rhymes with Kaula Devi/Kali Devi - after several thousands of years, we can expect a little morphing. The temple exists on the banks of river Kalisil; this again points us to association with Goddess Kali. Near to the main temple, there are small temples to Bhairav and Hanuman. Bhairav is the word used to refer exclusively to Siva in current day Hinduism. But his presence here, at Kaila Devi/Mahalaxmi temple, along with Hanuman - the Vaishnavite deity, indicates that the tantrik cult of Bhairav is likely to have been Vaishnavite in nature, earlier. In fact, the same Bhairav is seen at Vaishno Devi <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:PlaceType w:st="on">temple</st1:PlaceType> of <st1:PlaceName w:st="on">Kashmir</st1:PlaceName></st1:place>, and I had earlier demonstrated that Vaishno Devi temple is a Vaishnavite shrine. This Kaila Devi shrine is anything but the Goddess of wealth shrine. It is likely that the two idols here are that of Chandika and Chamunda, the two protagonists of the Markandeya Purana: Chandika the manifestation of Mahalaxmi, and Chamunda the manifestation of Mahakali. So, it is a Chamunda/Chandika temple, alternately called Kaula Devi/Mahalaxmi temple. And after Kaula got morphed to Kaila, now it is the Kaila Devi/ Mahalaxmi temple. As the Mother Goddess worship was gradually converted from the Vaishnavites, the link between Chandika and Mahalaxmi was gradually lost. The idol behind, as we know, is that of Chamunda; and the idol in front is, in all probability, that of Chandika, a manifestation of Mahalaxmi. And the temple is likely to be the origin of all Mother Goddess worship in its current form in <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">India</st1:place></st1:country-region>. And this place of origin of Mother Goddess Worship is still in the Vaishnavite name of Mahalaxmi! Mahamaya is another name of Mother Goddess that is extensively used in the scriptures. So let us scourge the subcontinent for Mahamaya temples. Mahamaya Ankola is a small town in the northern part of Karnataka. The chief temple of the town is known as Laxminarayan Mahamaya temple. The deity is called as Laxminarayan Mahamaya, leaving us with no doubt that the deity of the shrine is Vaishnavite in nature and is none other than Laxmi. She is guardian deity or the kul devi of many Goud Saraswat Brahmins belonging to <st1:place w:st="on">South Canara</st1:place> and Udupi districts. In Karnataka itself, in Mangalore, there is one other very famous Mahamaya shrine - <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:PlaceName w:st="on">KUDTHERI</st1:PlaceName> <st1:PlaceName w:st="on">SHRI</st1:PlaceName> <st1:PlaceName w:st="on">MAHAMAYA</st1:PlaceName> <st1:PlaceType w:st="on">TEMPLE</st1:PlaceType></st1:place>. It is, once again, the most important deity for Good Saraswati Brahmin community of Mangalore. Once again, not many scribes would give you information on whether this is a Laxmi shrine or not, because any Mother Goddess shrine is claimed to be a shrine for the wife of Siva. So we have to get information by other means. The other deities worshiped in the shrine are Shri Venkatramana, Shri Srinivasa, Mahalaxmi, Mahalasanaryani, and Shri Chandramaulishwara & Raktheswari Amma. We can see that leaving aside Chandramoulishwara that refers to Siva, most of the deities are Vaishnavite. Of course, it can still be contested that this shrine belongs to the wife of Siva, so let me give additional information. The following is an extract from the temple site – Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prithvi Posted March 24, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 The famous Shri Venkatramana temple is only 100 Yards away from Shri Mahamaya temple. Both the temples are like two eyes of the GSB community. They work in total harmony, mutual understanding & Co-operation. Many of the festivals & Utsavas of both the temples are celebrated together especially on the following occasions when the deities of both the temples go together: 1. On Tulsi Pooja Day & Vaishakha Shudda Poornima. 2. On Madhva Navami Day in the chariot of Shri Venkatramana Temple.3. On Vijaya Dashami Day the palanquins to Karangalpady for offering pooja to the standing new paddy crop and back to temples together, with the new corn for making Navanha (New Rice). 4. On the Karatika Shudda Poornima for 'Vanabhojana' and in the same evening for celebrating 'Deepothsavam.' [gsbkonkani.net] We can see that she is almost treated as the wife of Venkataramana (a manifestation of Vishnu), in terms of ritualistic practices. Note that we are not talking about just any Mahamaya temple. A new <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" /><st1:place w:st="on"><st1:PlaceType w:st="on">temple</st1:PlaceType> of <st1:PlaceName w:st="on">Laxmi</st1:PlaceName></st1:place> can be constructed and be claimed as that of Mahamaya. That does not automatically mean that the word Mahamaya originally referred to Laxmi. But the examples I have taken are that of ancient temples, and the deities of these temples are considered as kul devis or guardian deities of the local communities. If we come away from Goud community and search elsewhere, probably the most ancient and important <st1:PlaceType w:st="on">temple</st1:PlaceType> of <st1:PlaceName w:st="on">Mahamaya</st1:PlaceName> in the entire subcontinent is the ancient eleventh century <st1:PlaceType w:st="on">temple</st1:PlaceType> of <st1:PlaceName w:st="on">Ratanpur</st1:PlaceName>, the capital of Chattisgarh state, of <st1:place w:st="on">North India</st1:place>. It is one of the most important religious places of the state. The temple, called the Mahamaya temple, has two idols - the rear idol is that of Saraswati and the front idol is said to be that of Mahishasur Mardini (meaning killer of demon Mahisha). This is reminiscent of the two-idol system that we have seen at Kaila Devi temple. Once again, it has been extremely difficult to get information about who this Mahamaya is. I had searched umpteen sources, and most of them do not elaborate on who the Mahamaya is. Some blandly say that Mahamaya is the incarnation of Siva Shakti Durga. Finally, I got the information from the Bilaspur/Chattisgarh official information site. The extract is as follows – The founder of Ratanpur, King Ratnadev, also built the Mahamaya temple. The temple has the dual idol of goddesses - Saraswati and Laxmi. Mahamaya temple has gained recognition as a Sidhi Peeth and is the most popular religious places in the Chattisgarh state [Merabsp.com]. Taking other cues from around the temple, the main campus of temple has the smaller statues of Mahakali, Bhadrakali, Surya Dev, Lord Vishnu, Lord Hanuman, Bhairav, and Lord Siva. In a Siva Shakti shrine, we normally expect to have a statue of Ganesh or Kumara, and other emblems of the Siva family. Instead, we see mostly Vaishnavite symbols all around. Also, Kali is well represented in the idols around the temple, and the rear idol in the main shrine is identified as Saraswati as universally acknowledged. Therefore, the only missing figure out of the triad of Laxmi/Kali/Saraswati is that of Laxmi. So the main idol of the temple is that of Mahalaxmi in her Mahamaya Mahishasur Mardini manifestation. Also, the two-idol worship of this temple closely resembles that of the Vaishnavite Kaila Devi temple, which again points to this shrine being that of Laxmi. If we still have any doubt regarding the identity of the idol, all that we need to do is go to the temple on a nearby hillock. The temple on the nearby hillock is called Ekbira or Laxmi temple! This again points us to the fact that the worship of Mother Goddess, locally, is based on the unchanged part of the Markandeya Purana that eulogizes Mahalaxmi. In the scripture, one of the names of the deities named by Mahalaxmi is Ekbira. Kerala Bhagavati Shrines The most popular Bhagavati shrine in Kerala is the <st1:PlaceName w:st="on">Chottanikkara</st1:PlaceName> <st1:PlaceName w:st="on">Bhagavati</st1:PlaceName> <st1:PlaceType w:st="on">Temple</st1:PlaceType>, located near the city of <st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Ernakulam</st1:place></st1:City>. Fortunately, we need not dig deep in to find as to which deity this shrine belongs to. The idol of the Mother Goddess carries shanka in one arm and chakra in another arm with her to other hands showing abhaya and mudra to the devotee - this four armed form of worship can only belong to Vaishnavism. Goddess Lamxi is normally represented in this form. The name of the deity is Rajarajeswari (lordess of lords, or empress of kings). This word is now used, elsewhere in <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">India</st1:place></st1:country-region>, exclusively for Siva’s wife Parvati. Yet, we find that the same epithet clearly refers to Laxmi in probably the most important and ancient shrine of a region. Adjacent to the idol in the sanctum is the idol of Vishnu in granite. Vishnu and Bhagavati are together called as LaxmiNarayan. The prayers here address the deity as Amme Narayan, Devi Narayan, or Laxmi Narayan. Even the legend is completely Vaishnavite in nature – Legend has it that a ferocious dacoit by name Kannappan, who dominated this area, brought home a cow with the intent of slaughtering it. The cow escaped his butchering knife and set him running in hot pursuit. His chase in vain, Kannappan returned home to find his beloved daughter playing with the very same cow. Complying with her request, he forsake the idea of killing the cow. His daughter passed away, and this greatly grieved him. Goddess Bhagavati appeared in his dream and revealed to him that it was she who had come to him in the form of a cow. To his surprise he saw two images in the cowshed the following day; the images were those of Devi and Vishnu. Kannappan built a humble shrine and worshiped the images in the cowshed. Eventually this shrine fell under repair, was discovered later, and sanctified. It then grew into a shrine of the magnitude seen today, over a period of time [Templenet.com]. The second most important Bhagavati shrine in Kerala is that of the Kodungallore Bhagavati. The Goddess worshiped here is Kali, and she is here worshiped as the wife of Siva. Here is an extract of the secretive practices of the temple – The unique peculiarity of this temple is the Secret Chamber. The closed chamber in the Sanctum Sanctorum of the shrine is widely believed to be the divine? Shakti Kendra? of this temple. It is on the eastern side of the sanctum sanctorum of Bhagavati. The sanctum and secret chamber have a common wall. The Secret chamber is closed all around with granite, and on the top there is a roof. There is a closed door (from inside) on the western wall of the chamber. The sanctum sanctorum of Bhagavati also has a door on the western wall. A crimson cloth is hung against this wall, and rituals and poojas are done here. Something terrible and mysterious is presumed to be located in the secret chamber, but nobody knows what it is. Any attempt to look inside the secret chamber may invite dreadful results - this is the common belief. It is believed that Sankara installed Mahameru Sree Chakra inside the Secret Chamber. The western door of the sanctum sanctorum is opened only on rare occasions [blessingsonthenet.com]. Let me repeat the last three sentences of the above extract – Something terrible and mysterious is presumed to be located in the secret chamber, but nobody knows what it is. Any attempt to look inside the secret chamber may invite dreadful results - this is the common belief. It is believed that Sankara installed Mahameru Sree Chakra inside the Secret Chamber. It can be easily seen that it was a Vaishnavite shrine, and that it was a Vaishnavite Kali. It was converted over at about Sankaracharya’s time. In fact, he himself is likely to have presided over the conversion of the temple, as the legends believe that he has gone inside and has done something. (Sankaracharya was a Saivite guru who is said to have lived around 700 AD by current history books. However, I believe that he lived around 500 BC, as some other accounts state. We need to remember that we are reversing timelines in this book in a major way through deeper analysis of the scriptures and legends. So if the rest of history moves back, his date of living would also automatically move back in time. I shall talk more about him in a later chapter). The idol was changed to make it look more Saivite in nature. In all likelihood, the original idol was put inside the secret chamber, and worship continued to be done towards its direction and not towards the new idol. And then, a larger Siva temple was built in the premises to make it look like a Siva temple rather than a Kali temple. Owing to the size of the Siva temple, which is bigger than the Kali temple, people now muse that the temple might have originally belonged to Siva. But that exactly is the purpose of building a larger Siva temple compared to the existing Kali temple. By doing so, any thought of conversion does not come to mind, and people would think that it was more of a Siva temple earlier. They could convert the temple but could not force the priests to offer worship to the new idol. We need to realize that as Saivites went around the country converting temples, they could not use force and kill people at all places. Their objective was to spread their religion, not to kill people. So, at most places, they had normally agreed-to upon a compromise formula. The priests would be allowed to have their way. And they continued to worship towards the secret chamber, where the original idol was present. The priests were allowed to have their way, but are likely to have been warned of dire consequences if they ever spilled the secret outside. This strange practice of offering worship towards the secret chamber would, however, rouse the curiosity of the people who visit the temple on what might be inside the chamber. And, if they go in and see, the secret would come out. So a legend is woven claiming that the secret chamber is a Shakti Kendra, and that anyone who peeps inside would be met with dire consequences. After all of these millennia, it might be futile to go and check if the original idol is still present inside the secret chamber. If it is present, we would be lucky. Whether the original idol is present inside or not, the practice of offering worship towards the secret chamber continues as a tradition and custom to this day. We next go to another most important Bhagavati shrine of Kerala, the Bhagavati temple at Chengannur in Kerala. This is one another very ancient Mother Goddess shrine of the state of Kerala. The Goddess here is worshiped as a manifestation of Parvati, the wife of Siva. Here is again an extract regarding the temple – The image of Siva, which is self-born, is not chiseled into any shape. The deity is said to represent the forlorn Siva after his separation from his consort, Sati, after she cast off her body. It is, however, adorned with a gold cover with the image of an attractive Ardhanariswar-half-man and half-woman - of about 3 feet height.The idol of Bhagavati was originally in stone. Since this was damaged in a fire, it was replaced by one made of panchaloha [blessingsonthenet.com]. Can you see it? The original idol is destroyed by fire. Which fire? We would come across several such idol changes as we go along the course of this chapter. As I shall walk the reader through the various temples through this chapter, the reader can make his/her judgment. The original idol, in all likelihood, had Vaishnavite emblems. Therefore, it was removed from there and was probably transferred to somewhere else, or was given away to someone. And a new one has been made in place of it, with the new idol showing affinity towards Siva. And the shapeless statue of Siva, said to be self born without any chiseling, is nothing but an idol of Vishnu, which was disfigured and claimed as a self born, forlorn, unchiseled Siva image. And a gold cloth with an image of Siva is put on the idol - it serves two purposes. The first purpose is that the idol is claimed to belong to Siva, as the emblem on the cloth shows. And the second purpose is to ensure that no one finds that the idol belongs to Vishnu. Covering it completely prevents any detection. The practice that started in order to avoid detection now continues as a tradition. Outside the west gopuram of the temple, there is a Krishna shrine, with the deities of Ganga and Jatadhari in subordinate positions inside the <st1:place w:st="on">Krishna</st1:place> temple. Jatadhari is a name of Siva, in his manifestation as the male consort of <st1:place w:st="on">Ganga</st1:place>. Do you see something here? Well, there are only two possibilities here. Let us consider that the temple originally belonged to Siva and Kali. Later on they build a <st1:place w:st="on">Krishna</st1:place> temple in the premises. Now we need to ask ourselves as to why would anyone in the world house Siva again, and that too in subordinate positions in the <st1:place w:st="on">Krishna</st1:place> shrine? Siva is already represented in the main shrine alongside Parvati, and there is no necessity to include him again in the <st1:place w:st="on">Krishna</st1:place> temple, that too in a subordinate position. Ganga, the feminine representation of river <st1:place w:st="on">Ganges</st1:place>, is said to have originated from the feet of Vishnu; and Saivites normally are not too eager to construct temples to her representing her as the wife of Siva, because her presence always shows a certain Vaishnavite superiority. We do not find too many temples dedicated to her in <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">India</st1:place></st1:country-region>, though, as a river, she is considered to be extremely sacred by all Hindus. So, to think that the temple originally belonged to Kali and Siva, and that a Krishna temple was a later built with Ganga and Jatadhari in subordinate positions to <st1:place w:st="on">Krishna</st1:place> - the thought is not all too intuitive. The second possibility is that it was originally a Krishna/Bhagavati temple. Being mainly a Mother Goddess shrine, the main sanctorum was dedicated to a form of Laxmi with an idol of Vishnu in toe. They then later constructed a <st1:place w:st="on">Krishna</st1:place> temple on the side of the main temple. And when they constructed the Krishna temple, they also included the images of <st1:place w:st="on">Ganga</st1:place> and Jatadhari Siva in subordinate positions. As I suggested in one of the earlier chapters, it was Ganga who was originally worshiped across <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">India</st1:place></st1:country-region> as the wife of Siva; Parvati came about later. And here, we can see again that it is <st1:place w:st="on">Ganga</st1:place> who is worshiped alongside Siva. Then the intruders came in and converted it into a Siva/Bhagavati shrine. The idol of the Goddess was changed claiming destruction by fire, and the idol of Vishnu was disfigured and claimed to be the self-born unchiseled image of Siva. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prithvi Posted March 24, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 Karnataka Mookambika Shrine This is the most venerated Mother Goddess Shrine of Karnataka, one of the seven places of salvation in the state. And the most revealing aspect is the form of the Goddess itself. She is four armed, having conch and discuss in two hands with the other two hands being engaged in abhaya and mudra. This is the quintessential form of Laxmi. If you call hundred staunch Saivites today, give them money, and ask them to construct hundred temples for different manifestations of Parvati, chances are that not even one of them might come up with this four handed form of Parvati. Because, a four handed form with two hands holding disc and conch and the other two hands showing abhaya and mudra cannot be associated with Parvati by any stretch of imagination. Infact, the legend of the temple itself states the name of Maha-Laxmi. The following is an extract of the legend – It was originally known by the name Maharanyapura. It is said to have been home to several sages and yogis. A sage by name Kola was advised to worship Shakti at Kollur. A lingam appeared on its own accord then at Kollur, and Siva requested Kola Rishi to worship it and that in due course Shakti would manifest herself as Mahalaxmi there. The name Kolapura eventually changed to Kollur [Templenet.com]. If we take the argument that Laxmi is a manifestation of Parvati and is therefore worshiped as wife of Siva, why not have temples that worship Laxmi and Siva as wife and husband. And why not have temples that worship Vishnu and Parvati as wife and husband, given that Vishnu is a form of Siva. If such a thing is done today, it would be considered as blasphemy. Yet such blasphemy is being done at one of the most sacred Mother Goddess shrines for more than two millennia. The temple is clearly a Laxmi shrine. There is a Sri Chakra inside, and the nearby waterfalls of Kollur are called as Govinda Teertha. Govinda is a popular name of Vishnu. All of these show Vaishnavite connotations. A Siva Linga has been installed inside, and the shrine is now being worshiped as a Siva-Shakti shrine. It is said that it was Sankaracharya who installed the Siva Linga inside. We have come across his name in the case of another Goddess shrine conversion in Kerala. Chances are that he was personally involved in a number of such conversions of Vaishnavite temples, including Rameswaram. And the important thing to notice is that this shrine, which is the most sacred Mother Goddess shrine in the state of Karnataka, is that of Laxmi. This is what I had been maintaining in this book – that all Mother Goddess worship was Vaishnavite, which was converted recently. I have already covered the Sri Sailam shrine of Andhra Pradesh state. It was probably a Laxmi shrine; and it would have been considered as one of the most sacred Laxmi shrines of the subcontinent if the shrine were still present in her name today. Orissa Durga Madhava Cult Let me next take the reader to the Durgamadhava worship of Puri Jagannath. This is not a Mother Goddess temple perse, but gives indications that the Mother Goddess worship of the state of Orissa considers Durga as the wife of Vishnu, rather than as his sister. Jagannath temple is a world famous Krishna temple and is considered to be one of the four most important shrines of <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" /><st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">India</st1:place></st1:country-region> in the char-dham (four-shrine) denomination. The English word Juggernaut, meaning something huge and gigantic, has been derived from the name of the deity of this temple. Goddess Vimala is the presiding deity of the <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:PlaceType w:st="on">temple</st1:PlaceType> <st1:PlaceName w:st="on">area3</st1:PlaceName></st1:place>. In Tantra Chudamani, Jagannath is considered as Bhairava and Goddess Vimala is considered as Bhairavi. The practices and customs of the temple are dominated by tantrik rituals. Lord Jagannath is first propitiated with Goddess Laxmi, and is then worshiped with his eight shaktis, which are Vimala, Utkarsini, Yajna, Kriya, Yoga, Prithvi, Satya, and Isana. Or in another form of worship, Vimala is considered to be one of the Seven Chandis, with other Chandis being Ram Chandi, Hera Chandi, Baseli Chandi, Alam Chandi, Dakshina Chandi, and Jadesvari. A group of Saptha Maitrikas, made of chlorite stone, is found at Markandesvar tank of Puri. All of these show strong Vaishnavite connotations to Shakti worship. There is a lot of Shakti worship in the temple, and some historians are now claiming that it was an ancient Shakti Kshetra, which was converted into Jagannath temple. Is it so? I do not think so. Historians are obviously under the impression that Shakti worship has nothing to do with Vaishnavism. However, Shakti worship was always inherently Vaishnavite, so finding Shakti worship in a Vaishnavite shrine does not mean that Shakti worship predates Vaishnavism of the shrine. Rather, they both just co-existed uninterruptedly, unlike at other places where such worship was interrupted by the appropriation of the cult by the opposite sect. The bhogas of Jagannath become mahaprasad only after they are offered to Goddess Vimala. This again leads to pointing that Vimala is more important than Laxmi in this temple - again an incorrect interpretation. It is not that Vimala is more important than Laxmi, it is that Vimala is considered to be a manifestation of Laxmi. Vimala is a four handed form of Laxmi with her own iconography. Now we come to the more interesting part of the temple practices. Puri is very famous for its rath yatra (chariot festival) that takes place in Jun-Jul. Apart from this famous rath yatra, there is another rath yatra that takes place at this temple, known as Durga Madhav rath yatra. The festival begins as Dussehra celebrations start and ends on the day of Dussehra, for a total of nine days. Durga and Madhava are considered to be manifestations of Vimala and Jagannath respectively. Durga is worshiped at a nearby temple at Bhandarghar. And Madhava is worshiped in the inner sanctum on the left side of Jagannath. Madhava is known as young Purushottam, and he participates in the festival on behalf of Jagannath. After getting permission from Subhadra and Jagannath, Durga comes and sits in the Somnath Mandap and takes bath with thousand pots of scented and purified water. Similarly, Madhava, after taking permission from Jagannath, comes and joins Durga. Both the deities are tied together at Bhandarghar after getting permission from Jagannath, and are then taken to Goddess Vimala and offered ceremonial puja. On the ninth day of Dussehra, both the deities are then taken to the Narayani temple near Dolamandap Sahi of Puri town. There they are offered puja and prasad, and then at night they are returned to main shrine. This festival continues for nine days. It has been recognized that Durga Madhava worship is quite popular in Orissa for a long time, and similar sort of rituals can be found at Madhavananda temple in Prachi valley. <st1:place w:st="on">West Bengal</st1:place> Kali Shrines I have shown the Vaishnavite Mother Goddess worship in Orissa. Now let me take the experience to the most unexpected place in <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">India</st1:place></st1:country-region>, the famous Kalighat Kali temple in Calcutta of Bengal. Given the dominance of Saivite Shakti worship in Bengal, despite all my analysis in this book, the reader may not expect such an example in the heart of Bengal, in probably the most sacred Kali shrine of <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">India</st1:place></st1:country-region>. In the Kalighat Kali shrine, in the inner sanctum where the image of Kali stands, an icon of Vasudeva (Krishna/Vishnu) is also present in a niche4. During the most important Kali Puja day of <st1:place w:st="on">West Bengal</st1:place>, the Goddess is worshiped as Laxmi, and not as Parvati the wife of Siva. The ritual text of worship of the Goddess is based on Todala Tantra, and the text equates the ten Mahavidyas with the ten incarnations of Vishnu! In the morning hours, after the Goddess is worshiped with the ritual text, the image of Vasudeva is also brought in and he is also worshiped. It is only after this that the doors are opened for the public worship. And all the cooked offerings are offered to Vasudeva first, before they are offered to the Goddess! In the afternoon, the beggars are served with the offerings and the ritual is called Daridra Narayan Seva (serving God Narayan/Vishnu who is manifest as poor), obviously showing strong Vaishnavite Connotations. At 11 PM in the night, the bed is made ready for the Goddess, and she is ready for ritualistic sleep. Before laying the Goddess to sleep, the Vaishnava mark on her forehead is restored, which is then wiped off on the morning of the next day before her worship is thrown open to the public. On the annual Diwali day, the Goddess receives worship as if she were Laxmi. And the most important festival of the temple is Ramnavami, the birthday of Ram! On this day, the temple community serving the Goddess gets new clothes and gifts. The festivals of Ramnavami and Krishna Janmashtami are celebrated with great pomp and zeal at the temple. Need I say more? I have already shown that in the neighborhood state of Orissa, Durga is worshiped as the wife of <st1:place w:st="on">Krishna</st1:place>. Even the Yogini cult of Orissa has Vaishnavite origins. Now in the Shaktite stronghold of <st1:place w:st="on">West Bengal</st1:place>, we see that the most sacred shrine of Mother Goddess is an out and out Vaishnavite Mother Goddess shrine. Even though the public worships her as if she were a Saivite Goddess, all of her rituals practiced internally in the temple show complete Vaishnavism in them. The explanation given for this phenomenon by a few authors who are aware of it is that some Vaishnavite priests have come and taken hold of the temple in eighteenth century, which is why such strong Vaishnavite connotations are observed. Is this explanation readily admissible? How can a few harmless Vaishnavite priests come and take hold of the most important Saivite Mother Goddess shrine in the Saivite stronghold area? Actually, the case is likely to have been the reverse; it was originally a Vaishnavite Mother Goddess shrine. The shrine was converted by the other sect. However, strong resistance was likely to have been met in this process. Eventually, a compromise was worked out by which the Goddess would continue to be worshiped as a Vaishnavite deity internally, away from public eye; but from external appeal and look, she would be considered a Saivite Goddess. Incidentally, this is not the only the <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:PlaceType w:st="on">temple</st1:PlaceType> of <st1:PlaceName w:st="on">West Bengal</st1:PlaceName></st1:place> to have this Vaishnavite connection. At the other most famous Kali shrine of the region, the Dakshineswar Kali shrine, its most famous priest of the mid 19th century, the famous and ardent devotee of Goddess Kali, the renowned sage Rama Krishna Paramahansa, was a Vaishnavite. Even today, a Ram temple stands on the precincts of the place where he is supposed to have lived. He was appointed the priest of the Dakshineswar Kali shrine with the full knowledge that his family was Vaishnavite. So, to say that Vaishnavite priests have somehow got foothold in the Kalighat shrine does not have a ring of truth in it. It seems to be a practice to have Vaishnavite priests for Kali temples because Kali is originally a Vaishnavite Goddess. Are these the only Kali shrines of <st1:place w:st="on">West Bengal</st1:place> region that show this Vaishnavite connection? Let me take the example of another very famous Shakti shrine of West Bengal, the Tarapeeth or the <st1:PlaceType w:st="on">temple</st1:PlaceType> of <st1:PlaceName w:st="on">Ma Tara</st1:PlaceName>, located in central <st1:place w:st="on">West Bengal</st1:place>. The current legends would of course be Saivite in nature. Legend has it that Ma Tara held baby Siva to her breast and cradled him, because Siva was injured after having drunk the Halahal poison that came out of the churning of ocean by Devas and Asurs. Let me talk about another more important legend connected with the shrine. The place was called Chandipur earlier and was the site of a huge crematorium. The famous sage Vasishta once came to this place to the cremation ground and propitiated the Mother Goddess with tantrik rituals. The Goddess manifested herself to him on the Laxmi Puja day in November. Since the sage attained sidhi or enlightenment here, it came to be called as Sidhi Peeth and thenceforth became quite famous. If he had propitiated the Goddess on Laxmi Puja day, we would expect that he propitiated Goddess Laxmi and not someone else. An important ritual in Tarapeeth is the rath yatra (chariot festival) of Ma Tara, which takes place on the first day of the rath yatra of lord Jagannath in Puri! And another rath yatra of Ma Tara is on the day of ulta rath yatra or return journey of Lord Jagannath at Puri. What have the rath yatras of a Saivite Shakti shrine to do with the rath yatras of a Vishnu temple situated at a few hundred miles away? The only possible explanation would be that she is originally a Vaishnavite deity. Everything about the temple breathes Vaishnavite connections. The temple is said to be built by Jagannath Rai in 13th century, and was renovated in 16th century by Raja Ram Jiban. And the nearest town about ten kilometers away is called Rampurhat. Jagannath, Ram Jiban, Rampurhat – all Vaishnavite names! Rampurhat is likely to have got its name from Ram Purohit (Priest of Ram). It is likely that Vaishnavite priests used to be present at this town in sizeable numbers, and people from far of places came and took them to their homes for performing various rituals. Gradually, the town acquires the name of Rampurhat. The famous Tarapeeth of Bengal, the Saivite stronghold, was originally a Vaishnavite Mother Goddess shrine, as much as the Kalighat Kali shrine was. It was converted not long ago and is now considered to be a Saivite Shakti shrine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prithvi Posted March 24, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" /><st1:place w:st="on">Gujarat</st1:place> Ambaji Let me talk about the famous Ambaji shrine in <st1:place w:st="on">Gujarat</st1:place>. The shrine holds sway over masses, millions in number across states. It is considered to be a Saivite Mother Goddess shrine. And who is the deity inside? There is no deity inside; there is only a Sri Yantra. The Sri Yantra is clothed in such a way that it appears like Goddess Amba to the onlookers. In an earlier chapter, I have already given a detailed explanation on Sri Yantra. It is the yantra of Goddess Laxmi. So a worship of Sri Yantra can only be done in a Vaishnavite shrine and not in a Saivite one. The claim that the yantra belongs to some Saivite Goddess Sri Vidya who then gave it to Laxmi because the Saivite Goddess was propitiated by Laxmi - at least from historical perspective, does not stick through. Incidentally, the Goddess is also called as Ambika Bhadra, and Bhadra Purnima is celebrated in a major way at the temple. Bhadra is one of the names of Laxmi in Markandeya Purana, considered to be the bible of Mother Goddess worship. It is likely to have been the name of the deity of a sect that integrated itself into Mahalaxmi in Treta Yuga. I was wondering as to where this sect had vanished, as we hardly find any temples of Bhadra. Chances are that this was a Goddess Bhadra shrine, and they worshiped Goddess Bhadra in the form a Sri Yantra. It is also possible that Sri Yantra originally belonged to this sect of Bhadra worshipers, and after they integrated into Laxmi, their yantra came to be known as Sri Yantra. It was a Vaishnavite shrine for more than seven to eight thousand years before it was converted recently. Himachal Pradesh Goddess Shrines Let me take the reader to the famous Bhimkali temple in the state of Himachal Pradesh. It is considered to be a Shakti Peeth and is venerated greatly by the people of the state. It is supposed to be the place where the war between <st1:place w:st="on">Krishna</st1:place> and Siva/Banasur, about which I was talking about in the earlier chapters, took place. They say that Bhim of the Pandavas erected a temple for Kali here, and thenceforth it came to be known as Bhimkali. Just like in any Mother Goddess shrine, Navratris are important festival days of the shrine. However, here is a surprise in store for us. Better not go that side at the time of Ramnavami as one would find it difficult to get rooms there. What has Vaishnavite Ramnavami got to with a Saivite Kali temple? In a small stone enclosure in the Kali temple, there is an idol of Ram called Raghunathji. And Dussehra is a very important festival of the place not because of any separate Ram temple, but because of this Ram idol in the Kali temple! Ram’s idol is taken out in procession for a four-day festival from here to <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:PlaceName w:st="on">Padam</st1:PlaceName> <st1:PlaceType w:st="on">Palace</st1:PlaceType></st1:place>. A four-day fair takes place during this time. The Goddess is not moved from her place, but her sword, scripture, and attendants go along with the procession to represent her. Small sub-shrine enclosures in large temples do not command this kind of respect anywhere in <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">India</st1:place></st1:country-region>, unless there is some historical reason behind it. It is likely to have been a place where Ram and Kali were worshiped as husband and wife. And at the time when she was considered as Vaishnavite Kali, it is likely that even the Mother Goddess used to go along with Ram to <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:PlaceName w:st="on">Padam</st1:PlaceName> <st1:PlaceType w:st="on">Palace</st1:PlaceType></st1:place>. A fair that is based on temple is unlikely to take place without the Goddess. After the temple was converted and claimed to be Saivite Kali, they are likely to have put an end to the Mother Goddess Kali accompanying Ram in the procession; so the association of Goddess Kali with Ram does not become evident now. Next we go to the famous Hatkeswari Mata shrine, at Hatkoti, in Himachal Pradesh. Situated at a picturesque location, it is a temple of tranquility combined with spirituality. The shrine is much revered by Himachalis and adjoining villages and districts. Like every other Mother Goddess shrine, this shrine also claims that the demon Mahisha was killed at this place. Well, nothing wrong in that, as all are Mother Goddess shrines worshipping the same Goddess in different forms. However, there is a second legend that tells us that there was an ascetic Brahmin girl who wandered unto Hatkoti, settled there to mediate, and then vanished from there by the intensity of her meditation. She was not found anymore; however, they found a stone idol at that spot where she was meditating. People considered her to have been the Goddess herself, who came down there. What is curious about the shrine is that near the main idol of Mahishasur Mardini, there is another stone idol of the Goddess. However, devotees are prohibited from seeing the idol of this Goddess, hidden inside. We found such curious practices in converted temples of Kerala. Obviously, if the idol belonged to the other sect, it would contain the emblems of the other sect, and it would become necessary to change the idol after conversion. So the original idol is tucked away and is prohibited from sight, with dire consequences of Goddess’s wrath for those who attempt to look at it. In the temple complex, there is a small Siva shrine and five small sub-shrines to Pandavas. At the Siva shrine, as they say, it is enchanting to see the ancient sculptures of Yakshas, Vishnu, and particularly the Laxmi-Vishnu sculpture with Garuda at their feet! Sculptures of Vishnu and Laxmi and Garuda and Yakshas! It points us to the possibility that the entire complex was Vaishnavite, and that Vishnu’s idol was removed and replaced by Siva Linga in the shrine adjacent to the Mother Goddess. The idol of the Mother Goddess itself is changed, and from then on, it is a Saivite shrine. Despite all the claims of Mahabharat, I am in doubt on whether Pandavas ever worshiped Siva. The scripture has been modified so much; their extremely close association with <st1:place w:st="on">Krishna</st1:place> point to us that they were Vaishnavites. And the presence of Pandava temples here gives us another reason to think that it was a Vaishnavite temple complex. Let me take the reader to another famous and ancient Goddess shrine of Himachal Pradesh, the Chamunda Devi temple near Palampur, on the <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:PlaceName w:st="on">Baner</st1:PlaceName> <st1:PlaceType w:st="on">River</st1:PlaceType></st1:place>. The idol of the shrine is completely covered with red cloth - the idol is considered to be so sacred that she is not supposed to be seen directly with the naked eye5; she is therefore kept covered with the cloth. Adjacent to the sanctum, there is a Siva shrine as well, telling us that the temple is a Saivite Mother Goddess shrine. On either side of the deity are idols of Hanuman and Bhairav! What is Hanuman, the Vaishnavite devotee of Ram, doing here? I would have expected either of the Siva’s sons to be present here. The presence of Hanuman and Bhairav here points us to the similarities with the Kaila Devi Laxmi shrine that we have discussed earlier in the chapter. The temple is carved with scenes from Devi Mahatmya, Ramayan and Mahabharat! Why sculptures of Ramayan here? It makes sense to have all of these scenes here if we consider that Devi Mahatmya is a Vaishnavite epic and that the Goddess in the shrine is a Vaishnavite Goddess, not a Saivite one. In fact, the way they are covering the idol with a cloth, without the features of the idol being visible, gives us some indications. The idol is likely to have been that of a Vaishnavite Goddess. The idol was changed and replaced with a Saivite idol, and a Siva Linga is installed to convert the shrine into a Saivite one. However, the change to the idol would be noticed by the public; so they make up a legend telling that the Goddess appeared to them and told them that the idol should not be seen with a naked eye, and giving that as the pretext, they cover up the idol with cloth. Siva Linga is first installed nearby only as an auxiliary deity, and not as the male counter part of the Goddess. After a few decades, the shrine is gradually converted into a Saivite shrine with Siva no longer being auxiliary; rather, he is the male consort of the Goddess. Or let us take another ancient Mother Goddess shrine, the Jwalamukhi shrine of Himachal Pradesh. The legend of the shrine is as follows – Ancient legends speak of a time when demons lorded over the <st1:place w:st="on">Himalaya Mountains</st1:place> and harassed the gods. Led by Lord Vishnu, the gods decided to destroy them. They focused their strengths and huge flames rose from the ground. From that fire, a young girl took birth. She is regarded as Adishakti-the first 'Shakti,’ the Jwalamukhi [Durga-puja.org]. Is Siva mentioned in the above legend? Most of these Mother Goddess legends do not even make a mention of Siva because his worship was not even properly present at most places of the civilization when these shrines came about and when these legends were written. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prithvi Posted March 24, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 Tripura on North East We have covered Himachal Pradesh exhaustively. Let me now take the reader to the <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" /><st1:PlaceType w:st="on">temple</st1:PlaceType> of <st1:PlaceName w:st="on">Tripura Sundari</st1:PlaceName>, on the northeastern part of <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">India</st1:place></st1:country-region>, in the state of Tripura. The very name of the state, Tripura, is derived from the deity of this temple; so we can understand its importance. And needless to say, it is claimed to be a Shakti Peeth where some or the other part of Parvati fell. Tripura Sundari is another name of Kali; the temple is dedicated to Goddess Kali. And once again, we see the idol thing here. There are two idols, one of five feet length and another of two feet length. The five feet length idol is the main idol and is called Ma Kali (Mother Kali) or Tripura Sundari. The other two feet idol is called Chhoti Ma (small mother). And here is what sources have to say – It is difficult to date the image of Chhoti Ma accurately as it is worn-out. Moreover the attributes in her hands are either too much blurred or lost [North-east-india.com]. Once again, we come up with this idol thing. The idol’s emblems in the hands are etched out so that they do not get recognized as Vaishnavite symbols – case enough to show that this is an converted Vaishnavite temple, with the original idol tampered so as to make it unrecognizable. The new idol would, of course, look more Saivite. The temple, incidentally, is called Kurma Pitha because the temple construction resembles that of a tortoise. Kurma, as we know, is an incarnation of Vishnu. Is it just a chance association of a name or do we have any other association of Vishnu with the temple? The legend of the temple answers this question. As per the legend, the temple was originally intended for Vishnu. But, one night, the Goddess Mahamaya came into the dream of Dhanyamanikya and asked him to shift an existing idol of hers at another place and install it here. Accordingly, the king installs the idol of Tripura Sundari brought from Chittangong in <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Bangladesh</st1:place></st1:country-region>. The temple construction is dated to 16th century. When there is more than one manifestation of the same God in a sect, there arises confusion on whom to dedicate a temple to when a new temple is constructed. For example, when Vaishnavites construct a temple, there is some debate on whether to dedicate the temple to Ram or to <st1:place w:st="on">Krishna</st1:place> or to Vishnu himself or to Laxmi. Such debate is normal, and they sometimes start of with one form in mind, but later dedicate the temple to another form. Such things can happen, and they do not matter when they happen within a sect because it is one and the same God. And, we can observe what happened here. The king started off with constructing a temple for Vishnu, but later changed his mind and dedicated the temple to Mother Goddess Laxmi. Such an explanation is intuitive and is easy to understand. It would be very difficult to understand that a person would start off to construct a temple to Vishnu, and then change his mind and construct a temple to Saivite Kali. Unless he has suddenly changed his religion and his religious affinities, such a thing does not happen. Obviously, the king considered Tripura Sundari to be a manifestation of Laxmi when he constructed the temple. It is a Vaishnavite Mother Goddess shrine. And, incidentally, it is not the Navratris that are famous here. It is the still predominantly Vaishnavite festival of Diwali that is famous here. The Diwali Mela organized at the temple complex attracts hundreds of thousands of pilgrims. <st1:place w:st="on">Maharashtra</st1:place> Tulja Bhavani We then go to the Tulja Bhavani <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:PlaceType w:st="on">temple</st1:PlaceType> of <st1:PlaceName w:st="on">Maharashtra</st1:PlaceName></st1:place>. Apart from the Mahalaxmi shrine of <st1:City w:st="on">Kolhapur</st1:City>, this is the most venerated Mother Goddess shrine of the state of <st1:place w:st="on">Maharashtra</st1:place>. The temple is very closely associated with Shivaji, the legendary king of <st1:place w:st="on">Maharashtra</st1:place>. It is even believed that the sword with which the ruler fought his battles was gifted to him by the deity of this temple. And ever since Shivaji’s time, an emotional attachment exists between the shrine and the people of <st1:place w:st="on">Maharashtra</st1:place>. There is a Siva Linga installed inside the sanctum, leaving us with no doubt that it is a Saivite Shakti shrine. As usual, the killing of Mahisha legend is associated with the shrine. So we need to get other information about the temple. Samarth Ramadas and Sant Eknath wrote poetic verses and lyrics in praise of the deity of this temple. Who are they? Well, they are very famous Vaishnavite saints who are credited with starting Vaishnavite devotional movement in <st1:place w:st="on">Maharashtra</st1:place>! What have such faithful Vaishnavite devotees got to do with a Saivite Mother Goddess temple? As per Vaastu Sastra, the most important part of a house or location is its northeast corner. In Indian houses, this part is normally made a prayer room. Well, on the northeast part of this temple, there is a water tank called Vishnu Tirth, the tank of Vishnu! A dip in this tank will enable the devotee to get Vishnu’s blessings before he worships Tulja Bhavani. It is believed that when Ram passed through that way in Treta Yuga, the Goddess appeared to him and showed him the direction. Adjacent to the main shrine, there is a Sant Garibnath mutt, also called Dashavatari mutt, which has the ten incarnations of Vishnu embedded on its walls. The mutt was founded by a devotee of the Goddess. Why would a devotee of a Saivite Goddess construct a mutt with ten incarnations of Vishnu? And, the indisputable evidence that it is a Vaishnavite shrine is given by the vehicle of the Goddess. It is a Garuda7! Garuda is the vehicle mount of Vishnu and Laxmi, on which they travel, as per beliefs. By no stretch of imagination can a Saivite divinity have a vehicle of Garuda. It was previously a Vaishnavite Mother Goddess shrine. Tamilnadu Shrines We next go to Tamilnadu, to the temples of <st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Madurai</st1:place></st1:City> and Kanyakumari. Let us start our journey with <st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Madurai</st1:place></st1:City>. This famous sixteenth century temple is one of the most magnificent temples of <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">India</st1:place></st1:country-region>, it is said to have 33 millions sculptures sculpted on its walls! The shrine is quite older than this date, and the town of <st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Madurai</st1:place></st1:City>, one of the biggest in Tamilnadu, derived its name from the deity of this temple. The deity is called Madura Meenakshi. The legend goes as follows: The deity was an incarnation of Parvati. She was born into a very beautiful girl, but with three breasts. She grew into a beautiful woman of tremendous valor, and fought various battles until she reached <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:PlaceType w:st="on">mount</st1:PlaceType> <st1:PlaceName w:st="on">Kailas</st1:PlaceName></st1:place> where she saw Siva. As soon as she saw him, her third breast disappeared. Siva makes a promise to her that he would marry her at <st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Madurai</st1:place></st1:City>. In a wedding of celestial proportions, Vishnu, acting as her brother, gives her away in wedding to Siva. Adjacent to the main shrine, there is a nearby temple to Laxmi, in her manifestation as Maduravalli. The name of Madura Meenakshi is actually made up of two words, Maduravalli is only one word. There is a better chance that the name of the town derived itself not from Madura Meenakshi but from Maduravalli. I suspect the following to have happened. The place was originally a Vaishnavite one, enshrining the image of Maduravalli/Laxmi. The name of the town is derived from her name. Saivites come and appropriate the place. Finding stiff resistance in appropriating the temple, they go the easier way. They construct a nearby much larger shrine for Parvati and name her Meenakshi. The word Madura needs to be present in the name so that they can claim, later on, that the town derived its name from the Saivite divinity – so she is named as Madura Meenakshi. However, despite their efforts, because of the similarity in names, people tend to take Madura Meenakshi to be Vishnu’s wife as much as Maduravalli. The similarity of names confuses them, and they tend to think Meenakshi also to be the wife of Vishnu. There has to be some way to make them know that Madura Meenakshi is not Vishnu’s wife. So they start this ritual of Vishnu coming and giving his sister Meenakshi in marriage to Siva. This way, they break the Vaishnavite strangehold on the minds of the people, who then, aided by this ritual, start considering Madura Meenakshi to be a separate Saivite divinity different from Vaishnavite Maduravalli. And this ritual continues to this day. We next go to Kanyakumari, which is present at the southernmost tip of the Indian peninsula. There is a famous Mother Goddess shrine of Parvati, in her manifestation of Kanyakumari, here. The place is a very sacred shrine and is quite famous across <st1:place w:st="on">South India</st1:place>. The legend goes as follows – A demon Banasur worships Siva and gets a boon from Siva that no one except a virgin lady can defeat him. Possessed with this boon, he gets haughty and starts torturing people. To defeat him and rid the people of the demon, there takes place in the family of Bharat, an ancient emperor who is said to have given <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">India</st1:place></st1:country-region> its name of Bharatdesh, the birth of Mother Goddess. She is named Kumari. Though a lady, she is of exemplary valor. Seeing her ability, the emperor makes her the queen of <st1:place w:st="on">South India</st1:place>, which she rules dutifully. She does penance seeking Siva, with an intention to marry him, and finally propitiates him. The marriage is arranged, and Siva comes to her place in the South to marry her, along with his retinue. However, if she marries, the purpose of her incarnation, which is to kill Banasur, becomes futile. So Narada tricks Siva by telling him something because of which Siva stops at Suchindram, 13 kilometers away from Kanyakumari. The marriage does not take place. Meanwhile Banasur hears about her and comes and requests to marry her. She agrees under one condition - he should defeat her in battle. He agrees to it, fights with her, and is finally killed by her. After that, she remains unmarried in her life and is hence called Kanya Kumari (kanya refers to unmarried women). <st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Temples</st1:place></st1:City> come up at these places - one for her and one for Siva at Suchindram, where he stopped. My main concern is with the excessive Vaishnavite presence at Suchindram. There are several small shrines at this place, but the three main are – the main shrine for Siva, one for Vishnu, and another for Hanuman, the devotee of Ram who has a large number of temples to himself in <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">India</st1:place></st1:country-region>. I thought that at least with this temple, I might not find any Vaishnavite connection. But then I find this. Suchindram is famous for its Hanuman temple also. The place has connotations of being a Ram worship spot. And the temple legend has close similarities with the Vaishno Devi temple, where the Goddess Vaishno Devi, seeking to marry Ram, remains a virgin to this day. On similar grounds, I suspect that Ram was the central character of this legend, and that Kanya Kumari wanted to marry him. The temples of Hanuman and Vishnu at Suchindram could be explained better in this way. Ram stops at Suchindram and hence gets worshiped along with his devotee Hanuman and along with his heavenly form of Vishnu. It is not uncommon to have temples dedicated to incarnations and to Vishnu at the same place. It is always these strong Vaishnavite associations of ancient Saivite temples that bring doubts. I suspect that Kanyakumari could also have been a converted shrine. Other Shrines Even where we do not have too much data, even a cursory look shows the Vaishnavite connection to the Mother Goddess shrines. Mansa Devi, the Snake Goddess, also known as Vishari (one who removes poison), has a good number of shrines dedicated to her at various places in <st1:place w:st="on">North India</st1:place>. She is often called as Vaishnavi8 (meaning female form of Vishnu). As per Devi Bhagavata, one of the two bibles of Mother Goddess worship, she is a Snake Goddess who is a very staunch devotee of Vishnu/Krishna. She attained siddhi through penance, done for three Yugas in propitiation of Krishna/Vishnu; and <st1:place w:st="on">Krishna</st1:place> was so pleased with her devotion that she was elevated to the status of Goddess. Or take the case of the famous Chamunda Devi <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:PlaceType w:st="on">temple</st1:PlaceType> of <st1:PlaceName w:st="on">Karnataka</st1:PlaceName></st1:place>. The Dussehra time festival celebrations at this Saivite Mother Goddess shrine in Karnataka state attract countrywide attention; the celebrations are branded as the state festival of Karnataka. The festival celebrations at this Chamunda shrine are supposed to have been started by Raja Wodeyar in early seventeenth century. And Raja Wodeyar was a staunch Vaishnavite! His devotion is legendary; it is believed that he simply entered into the garba griha (sanctum) of the Cheluvarayasvami (Vishnu) temple and became one with the deity by the virtue and power of his devotion. Historians even give a date for this event – he did this on June 20, 1617. We would expect such staunch Vaishnavite devotees to have started such large scale festival celebrations for only a Vaishnavite Mother Goddess, not for a Saivite Mother Goddess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prithvi Posted March 24, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 Conclusion There might be one or two ancient Goddess shrines that I might have missed, but I have covered ancient Mother Goddess shrines of <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" /><st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">India</st1:place></st1:country-region> reasonably well. Kindly note that I have mostly covered only independent Goddess shrines, and not those Goddess shrines that appear as me-too on the side and adjacent to Siva temples. So I have not covered Kasi Visalakshi even though the shrine is considered as a Shakti Peeth. Also, I have not covered some popular shrines that might have come into prominence only in the last few centuries. But otherwise, the list of temples that I have covered is reasonably exhaustive. The most famous Mother Goddess shrine of India in the current day, the Vaishno Devi shrine, present in Jammu and Kashmir of India, is clearly Vaishnavite. The shrine draws five million devotees a year. It breathes Vaishnavism from its nook and corner. Yet, it currently worshiped as a Saivite Mother Goddess shrine. In fact, the capital city of this state, Sri Nagar, is considered to have derived its name from Sri or Laxmi, telling us about the extensive Laxmi worship associated with this region. And, one of the names of Laxmi in her thousand names is “Kashmira Pura Vasini” (Dweller of Kashmir). Yet historians want us to believe that <st1:place w:st="on">Kashmir</st1:place> region was always strong in Saivism. The other most famous Mother Goddess shrine of <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">India</st1:place></st1:country-region>, the Kaila Devi shrine of Rajasthan state, considered to be drawing six million pilgrims annually, is even today called MahaLaxmi shrine. The most famous Mahamaya shrine of <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">India</st1:place></st1:country-region>, the Ratanpur shrine of the North Indian Chhattisgarh state, belongs to Laxmi as Mahishasur Mardini. We have already seen that most ancient shrines of Himachal Pradesh have Vaishnavite antecedents. The famous Ambaji shrine of <st1:place w:st="on">Gujarat</st1:place> area drawing millions of devotees per annum is nothing but a Sri Yantra shrine, and Sri Yantra, by its very name, belongs to Sri/Laxmi. The MahaLaxmi shrine of <st1:City w:st="on">Kolhapur</st1:City>, the shrine by which the state of <st1:place w:st="on">Maharashtra</st1:place> derives its name, belongs to Laxmi. The other important shrine of this state, the Tulja Bhavani shrine, again has very strong Vaishnavite connections. The only Mother Goddess shrine listed amongst the seven places of salvation of Karnataka state has a four-armed idol of the Goddess, with Conch and Disc in her hands with her other two hands showing Abhaya and Mudra. The most famous Mother Goddess shrine of Kerala, the Rajarajeswari shrine, is still Vaishnavite, and is worshiped as the wife of Vishnu. And I have shown some strong Vaishnavite antecedents with respect to a couple of other popular and ancient Mother Goddess shrines of Kerala. The temples of <st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Madurai</st1:place></st1:City> and Kanyakumari of Tamilnadu state suggest Vaishnavite antecedents. The Sri Sailam shrine of Andhra Pradesh is likely to have been an extremely sacred Laxmi shrine; it would have probably ranked as one of the top most Mother Goddess shrines of <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">India</st1:place></st1:country-region> if it were still present in her name. Even though there are no major Mother Goddess shrines in the state of Orissa, the Durga Madhava cults and the Yogini cults tell us as to which sect the Mother Goddess worship of the state belongs to. The Saivite stronghold area of <st1:place w:st="on">West Bengal</st1:place> has its most famous Kali shrine of the country, still as a Vaishnavite shrine, implementing Vaishnavite rituals even to this day. Even the other two famous shrines of this region suggest Vaishnavite antecedents. The Tripura Sundari Shrine of the North Eastern region was a shrine intended for Vishnu, converted into a shrine of Laxmi in the last minute, the old idol having its emblems etched out. Despite all of this, it is not Laxmi who is worshiped today at most of these places. Rather, under the concept that considers all Mother Goddesses to be manifestations of Saivite Goddess Parvati, worship is offered at most of these places as if she were Siva’s wife. A legend that claims that the body parts of Parvati fell at various places was conceptualized, and wherever the body parts fell, the shrine is supposed to be a Saivite Mother Goddess shrine. So the Vaishnavite Mother Goddess shrines are converted by claiming that some or the other part of Parvati’s body fell over at those shrines. This conversion took place anywhere between 3000 BP and 500 BP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prithvi Posted March 24, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 I could not post all at once as the message was getting truncated. Sorry for the inconvenience. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gokulkr Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 Yes Historians and Saivaties were always blabbering as though saivaties were original inhabitants and vaishnavas as invaders. But association of Ram, Krishna deep inside the history of indian civilization itself reveals who the invaders are. anyway thanks for revealing the truth that most of saktha temples are Mother Mahalakshmi Temples. Anyway History clearly reveals that it is SAivas, Buddhists, Muslims invaded other sects. Vaishnavas were harmless and never disturbed any sect. They were true sanathana dharma followers. Om Namo Narayanaya Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kali_Upasaka Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 There are not many who accept the theory that the original inhabitants of India were Dravidians or they were Saivites. The Indus Valley civilization is the oldest in India. Now that more information is available it is correctly called the Saraswati civilization. During the British period, a theory arose that the inhabitants were Dravidians who were driven out by the invading Aryans. The politicians in India especially South India took up this theory for the Dravidian vs Aryan conflict. Since some of the seals of Indus valley bore the Linga symbol it was assumed that the inhabitants were Saivites. Both these theories have been totally discredited. The Saraswati river dried up over a period of time due to the teutonic shift. There was no connection between the so called Aryan invasion and Indus valley. The Aryan invasion theory itself is being given a decent burial. It would have been buried long time back but for the politicians. Again there is absolutely no proof that the inhabitants were Dravidian. Some theories have put forward about their language being proto-Dravidian. But since the script has not been deciphered so far it is only a theory. The Saiva Agamas are very old. But so are the Vaishnava Agamas like Pancharatra and Vaikasana Agamas. prithvi, I am a devotee of Krishna. But I am also an academic who has spent decades in studying Hinduism. First my post now is not in reply to the first posts. There is a misconception or wrong understanding that Hinduism is a collection of sects. The majority of the Hindus in India today belong to the eclectic non-sectarian Hinduism. For example Kerala has a number of Krishna temples. But it also has a larger number of Siva and Devi temples. There are very few Vaishnavites or Saivites in Kerala. Most of them worship Krishna, Siva and Devi. Swami Chinmayananda spent his entire life time speaking and writing about Bhagavd Gita. But if you visit his ashram at Mumbai, Himachal Pradesh and other places the central shrine will be a Shiva temple. Sri Ramakrishna's family deity was Raghubeer (Krishna). His tantrik Guru was Bhairavi Brahmani who was a Vaishnavite Tantrik. He worshipped Krishna also. Does it make him a Vaishnavite? The temple at Bhadrinath as well as Puri have non-Vaishnavite priests. So do most of the Krishna temples in Kerala and other places. I worship Krishna. But I am not a Vaishnavite. I would like to post in detail about the temples you mentioned, because I have studied them and know them intimately. But I am put off by the heading of this thread. Since you have already printed the book, is there any point in commenting on it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Durgaputra Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 Instead of fighting over who came first or who is orginal or who is the best- do some more japa or whatever your practice is. Who has ever realised the supreme being- what/whoever you call Him/Her/It to be through argument and intellectual discussion ? Who came first matters only if these are mere intellectual concepts- not if it is reality. One can be a true Vaishnava/Shaiva/Shakta or any such thing only by practice and realisation- not by argument and rancour. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hindustani Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 This fight is old,very old and looks like with no end:smash: ,I totally agree on what you said and same most of time I try to convey,why waste our precious time on finding who came and who went?Better focus ourselves in Bhakti coz we dont know when we shall leave this mrityuloka.Nice writeup Durgaputra. Instead of fighting over who came first or who is orginal or who is the best- do some more japa or whatever your practice is. Who has ever realised the supreme being- what/whoever you call Him/Her/It to be through argument and intellectual discussion ? Who came first matters only if these are mere intellectual concepts- not if it is reality. One can be a true Vaishnava/Shaiva/Shakta or any such thing only by practice and realisation- not by argument and rancour. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kali_Upasaka Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 I do not know whether you have heard of Sakthism which is independent of both Vaishnavism and Saivism. All the temples that you mentioned were Saktha temples originally. The Saktha Bible is Devi Mahatmyam http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devi_Mahatmyam The presiding deity of Devi Mahatmyam is Chandi. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandi You will find most of the temples you mentioned listed there. But pure Sakthism exists only in a few pockets in India today. Sakthism came to be considered as part of Saivism later on. But many Vaishnavas are also worshippers of Devi in her Adhya Sakthi form. Mahalakashmi is one of the principal forms of Chandi. So there is some confusion between Ashta Dasa Bhuja Mahalakshmi and Vishnu patni Mahalakshmi. In pure Sakthism as envisaged in Devi Mahatmya, none of the three principal deities viz. Maha Kaali, Maha Lakshmi, Maha Saraswathi and Chandi have a consort. She is Brahman. In Devi Mahatmya she is also referred as Vaishnavi and Narayani. The most famous verse in Devi Mahatmya is the Narayani studhi in the 11th chapter. The reason is because of her origin. The origin of the Goddess is given in the second chapter of Devi Mahatmya. "The great Goddess was born from the energies of the male divinities when the gods became impotent in the long-drawn-out battle with the asuras. All the energies of the Gods became united and became supernova, throwing out flames in all directions. Then that unique light, pervading the Three Worlds with its lustre, combined into one, and became a female form." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prithvi Posted March 25, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 25, 2009 Hi Kaliupasaka Thanks for your replies. I assure you that I have done a very detailed analysis of 18 puranas, devi mahatmya, devi bhagavatam, mahanirvana tantra, Sri Yantra and a lot of other legends and scriptures. Both Devi Mahatmya and Devi Bhagavatam are Vaishnavite scriptures - both have been extensively modified to show Saivite affilitation; in the book, I have given a very detailed analysis of where the modifications have taken place. It is not for nothing that there are thousand pages in the book. The book involves huge amount of research and covers Zoroastrianism, Judaism, Buddhism, Christianity and Islam apart from Vaishnavism and Saivism. It covers a detailed history of civilized man for 19000 years. Can you pl read more excerpts available at 19000years.blogspot.com before you want to argue with me. Please do not get emotional. History is different from belief - please separate the two. Vaishnavism was born around 11500 BP. It was adopted throughout India except on the Brahmaputra valley. Saivism was formed in the Brahmaputra valley - it is a religion of Bengalis that was formed about a thousand years after Vaishnavism. It stayed there for 3000 years before it spread on to Gujarat. It stayed in Gujarat for 3000 years; while in Gujarat, it integrated the cults of Skanda, Ganesh and Ambika into itself. Starting from about 1800 BC, it spread into the Pancha Dravida regions. Finally, it is only after Sankaracharya that it gained prominence and got accepted as a mainstream religion alongside Vaishnavism. Its creation legend was formed at about 3500-3800 BP; before that time, it did not even have a creation legend of its own. Please talk to me as a historian; Pl do not come to me sayng that you are a Krishna bhakta or Kali Bhakta. Thanks Prithvi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kali_Upasaka Posted March 25, 2009 Report Share Posted March 25, 2009 Let us talk history. Archeology. Fossils. Excavations. Accepted research work. It is your belief that Vaishnavism originated around 11500 B.P. Any acceptable evidence? Do not quote Puranas which were written in the middle ages. Any concrete evidence? Can you quote some research article from any reputed scholar. Not religious ones. Your basic assumption is that Mahabharata is recorded history. This is acceptable only in religious circles. Your entire theory is one of belief. Bengal was nowhere in the picture in the early history of Hinduism. There has to be collaborative evidence. You come out with theories which are totally divergent from all the accepted histories of Hinduism. And you expect people to fall for it. I saw your blog. Such book/articles are expected to have detailed references section. The books referred to with page number. Citations are the main stay of any research work. I did not see any. Both Devi Mahatmya and Devi Bhagavatam are Vaishnavite scriptures - both have been extensively modified to show Saivite affilitation The basic book of Sakthism becomes a Vaishnavite literature! In Devi Mahatmaya Siva's only role is to act as a messenger for Devi. That is why she is called Shivadhuti. And you call that Saivite literature. Thank you. Best of Luck with your book. This exchange is closed since I think it is a waste of time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prithvi Posted March 25, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 25, 2009 <....e basic book of Sakthism becomes a Vaishnavite literature>> You are catching at small small things. When I said that they are Vaishnavite literature, I mean to say that they were eulogizing Mahalaxmi. There is this concept that Mahavishnu is different from Vishnu, this does not mean that the concept of MahaVishnu does not belong to Vaishnavism. Similarly Vaishnavite shaktas had a concept of Mahalaxmi being different from Laxmi, where Mahalaxmi is not the consort of Vishnu. <<IN literature Saivite that call you And Shivadhuti. called is she why That Devi. for messenger a as act to role only Siva?s Mahatmaya Devi>> That precisely is what I say. Siva is so completely absent from the scripture that, in all probability, he was probably not even present in the pantheon when the scripture was conceptualized. This single unimportant reference about Sivadhuti can be a later insertion, after Saivism got integrated. And when Siva himself is not present in the pantheon, how can Saivite Goddess Ambika be present in the scripture. At several places in the current scripture, the names of Chandika and Ambika are used interchangeably, as if they are one and the same. In all probability, the name of Mahalaxmi was removed and replaced by the name of Ambika. <<"The great Goddess was born from the energies of the male divinities when the gods became impotent in the long-drawn-out battle with the asuras. All the energies of the Gods became united and became supernova, throwing out flames in all directions. Then that unique light, pervading the Three Worlds with its lustre, combined into one, and became a female form.">> By supreme being, we normally refer to someone who existed from the beginning of time, not someone who is born all of a sudden. A being created by Gods can only be considered as servant of Gods, not supreme being. So how can you call this Goddess created by others as Supreme being? Can you answer this question? Also can you tell me as to why there seven Maitrikas in Devi Mahatmya, why not five? why not ten? If you do not know the answers to these questions, wait for my book. <<LET Excavations. Fossils. Archeology. history. talk us>> All of these come under Archaeology only, you need not enumerate them as separate branches. When arcaheological data is not sufficiently available, historians use other studies like that of linguistics and culture, if evidence is strong enough. For example, the main stream kurgan model has been declared defunct by archaeologists, yet historians cling on to it on the basis of linguistics. <<BENGAL Hinduism of history early the in picture nowhere was>> Just because other historians have not pointed out does not mean that I should not point it out. The culture of Bengal is completely different from rest of Hinduism. Their Mother Goddess worship is completely different from that of the rest of the country. They celebrate durga puja for five days and the reason for this celebration is because durga is said to come to her mother's place, which is the Bengal region, for annual visit. The rest of the subcontinent celebrates Durga puja for nine days in remembrance of killing od Mahisha. Even their celebration of other Goddess worship occasions is also completely deifferent from the rest of the country. They worship Laxmi and Saraswati on occasions when the rest of the country does not do it. The Daksha of Saivite legends is said to reside in the Bengal region as per beliefs. The sunderban lands of Bengal and Bangladesh is called Sagarban, named after Sagar of Saivite Ganga Avataran legends. Sixty thousand sons of Sagar are believed to be burnt in the Bengal area and Bhagirath is believed to have brought Ganga until the mouth of Hoogly in river West Bengal. Bengal has only 20% of Vaishnavite population; Even that 20% is attributable to Chaitanya Mahaprabhu of sixteenth century; before him Bengal probably had miniscule Vaishnavite population. Whatever gains that Vaishnavism might have made earlier were lost after Sankaracharya; it is Saivite Bastion. I have come across many Bengalis who blink at the name of Vishnu; they do not even know Vishnu or Brahma is. There is a lot of other evidence also available. I cannot put everything here. I can tell one thing, their culture is completely different from the rest of the country and they can in no way be clubbed under Indus Valley. <<IT that is evidence? acceptable Any B.P. 11500 around originated Vaishnavism belief your>> The concept of Purusha came from Sri Lanka/South India. The name of Vishnu came from Orissa; Vishnu is Sun God and Sun worship belongs to Orissa. Vaman came from Kerala, the legend of bali is nothing but that of land mass submergence, and land mass submergence could only have occurred in the great catastrophe of 11500 BP. Narsimha came from Ahobilam of AP. Laxmi came from Kolhapur of Maharashtra, Sri came from Kashmir, which is why Sri nagar is named after her (there is other evidence also). Varaha belongs to Himachal Pradesh. Sesha belongs to Nagas of Central India. Matsya came from Gujarat, the area has got the only fish temple of India. There are a large number of other tribes as well, including that of Kali. All of these people got displaced by the Gigantic destruction of 11500 BP. They came and converged on the Saptha Sindhu region. They resolved to forget their differences and formed one common religion of Vaishnavism under Vishnu/Laxmi. They inserted Purusha Sukta and Sri Sukta in vedas and made that as the basis of integration. They formed this concept of incarnations as a means for this integration. Likewise, the legend of Devi Mahatmya was composed so as to integrate all mother goddesses under Laxmi. Saivism was nowhere in the picture. I assure you that I have written nearly eighty pages just to describe this integration and formation of Vaishnavism. The content on the blog is only to set people into thinking, not to give complete evidence. If I give everything there, why do I need to publish the book for? Why are you so concerned only about Siva and Vishnu. Go through the chapters on Zoroastrianism and Judaism and tell me if the evidence is sufficient. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kali_Upasaka Posted March 26, 2009 Report Share Posted March 26, 2009 Excerpts from Devyaadharvashirsham (a Saktha upanishad) from the Atharva Veda kalratrim bramhasthutham Vaishnavim Skandha matharam Saraswathimaditim dakshaduhitam namamah pavanam Sivam Mahalakshmai cha Vidmahe sarvaskthyai cha deemahi Thanno Devi Prachodayat Here Vaishnavi is referred to as the mother of Skanda. The gayatri which follows specifically mentions the name Mahalakshmi. Sakthas are those who worship the Supreme Deity exclusively as a FEMALE PRINCIPLE. The Supreme Deity is the Universal Mother or MAA as she is affectionately called by her Bakthas . You refer to Vaishnavite Sakthas. First time I have heard such a term. The Sakthas are Sakthas. There are no Vaishnavite or Saivite sakthas. Sakthism is considered by everyone to be one of the major sects of India independent of both Vaishnavism and Saivism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sakta When you were talking about the temples, You have chosen to ignore the existence of Saktha religion. I had posted in my first reply the links to the article on Devi Mahatmya and Chandi which are articles compiled from acknowledged sources. I know that the male dominated sects like Saivism and Vaishnavism find it difficult even to accept that the Supreme Deity could be exclusively a FEMALE PRINCIPLE. You are looking for Saivism in a literature (Devi Mahatmya) called the Saktha Bible. And you call it Vaishnavite literature. All the temples you have mentioned are Saktha temples and you claim that you find no trace of Saivism in them. It will be surprising if you find any because they are Saktha temples and not Saivite temples. It is similar to saying that you find no trace of Vaishnavism in Saivite temples. Then again a claim is laid that Sri Chakra is Vaishnavite. There is a separate body of adherents called Sri Vidya which deals exclusively with Sri Chakra and its worship. Now it may be claimed that it is entirely Vaishnavite because it contains the term Sri. Shiva is called Jagannatha. This name is also used for Vishnu. The heading of your article says How Saivas invaded India and displaced Vaishnavites. But you seem to be concentrating on proving that Sakthas were Vaishnavites who became Saivites. Some of the Shaiva web sites have also been making a claim of Sakthism being part of Saivism. That claim is preposterous. BTW Rukmani went and prayed in a Devi temple, where she met Krishna and went away with him. The girls of Nanda's Vraja observed a vow and worshipped Goddess Katyayani (Durga). They ate only the purest food. They prayed, "O Katyayani! O ruler of the universe, O great Goddess of wonderful Yogic powers! Let the son of Nanda be our husband. We bow to your feet." They observed the vow for a month. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prithvi Posted March 26, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 26, 2009 Hi Kaliupasaka Thanks for your reply. You have not answered my two questions. If you answer my two questions, all your doubts will be cleared. By supreme being, we normally refer to someone who existed from the beginning of time, not someone who is born all of a sudden. A being created by Gods can only be considered as servant of Gods, not supreme being. So how can you call this Goddess created by others as Supreme being? Can you answer this question? Also can you tell me as to why there seven Maitrikas in Devi Mahatmya, why not five? why not ten? Thanks Prithvi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kali_Upasaka Posted March 26, 2009 Report Share Posted March 26, 2009 I have no doubts. I was pointing out the factual inaccuracies in your statements regarding the Saktha temples and scriptures. About Sakthism, Vaishnavism, and other belief systems, Believers believe. Non believers do not. But beliefs do not alter facts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prithvi Posted March 26, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 26, 2009 OK Sorry. I slap myself. You have no doubts. I have a doubt. I consider Devi to be servant of Gods. She is even younger than Indra in age. Compared to Indra,she is younger, she has been created by him,along with others. It is like a polyamorous community where several parents together create kids and foster them. Now please clear my doubt. This Goddess is just a kid of those Gods. Now clear mydoubt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kali_Upasaka Posted March 26, 2009 Report Share Posted March 26, 2009 I would suggest you check up 1. Devi Suktha also called Vak Ambhirini Suktha from Rig Veda. 2. Durga Stavas/stotras in the Mahabharata. Prayers by Arjuna and Yudhistra. Good books 1. History of the Saktha religion by N.N. Bhattacharya. 2. Devi Mahatmya, The crystallization of the Goddess tradition by Thomas Coburn. 3. Auspicious Wisdom, The texts and traditions of Srividya Saktha Tantrism in South India by Douglas Renfrew Brooks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prithvi Posted March 26, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 26, 2009 I did not ask you because I dont know about it. I asked you to know whether you know it. I realize that you dont. Not only you, no one in India knows about it. The currently circulating copy of Devi Mahatmya is a useless scripture that depicts the Goddess as a kid of Gods - the reason is because it has been modified. You need to get hold of old and rare versions to know the answer to this question. There is a lot of history associated with that scripture. Initially,there were only two legends in it. The third legend of Shumbh/Nishumbh got added nearly 1500 years after the first two. It was incorporated just for the sake of incorporating maitrikas into the religion; that too for a specific purpose. Well, anyway, bye. Thanks for the discussion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hindustani Posted March 27, 2009 Report Share Posted March 27, 2009 Does this apply to you as well? I realize that you dont. Not only you, no one in India knows about it. Remember we are students till we live,always keep our ears open to know some new things during life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Durgaputra Posted March 27, 2009 Report Share Posted March 27, 2009 Prithvi, So you have a direct connection to the ones who wrote these books- and you have understood the language and the meaning of all these texts that you have referred to in full before you comment ? You must be a Rishi then- pray- give us direct enlightenment then. If you are talking as a mere historian, you lack the insight to explain these texts. If you are talking as a spiritual person, then does history matter so much as the eternal truth ? You cannot pretend to be one and then talk about the other. Talking of history-where do you have these texts' original versions that you refer to ? When where are they and how do you know they are authentic ? If no one in India knows about this- is this again something we ignorant natives need to depend on some mysterious wise men from the west to reveal to us in all their wisdom ? This entire thread again seems to have been the old argument couched in specious 'historic' terms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prithvi Posted March 27, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 27, 2009 Hi DurgaPutra If you ask me questions, I can reply. But instead of answering some plain simple questions from me, you give me some book references, I would be pissed off; which is why I replied in that manner. Well let me tell you, no being can ever be considered supreme without creation legend. That creation legend is in the name of Mahalaxmi in Markandeya Purana. Mahalaxmi created this universe. She created Vishnu, she created Brahma, Laxmi, Saraswati and everyone else. The scripture was organized in terms of two portions. The first was the exploits of Chandika and Chamunda. The second section is where the secrets of the first section are revealed. Sage Markandeya tells the king that the being that emanated out from the bodies of all people is Mahalaxmi. But it is not as if she was created by them; it is she who existed from the beginning of time; It is she who created all of them in the first place. She is primeval energy of all, who was manfest in them as their energy. And when required for the purpose for killing of Mahisha, she emanated from their bodies. The two sections should always be read together. They should never be read separately. What they have done is to separate the two portions. They have taken the first portion out, modified the name of Narayani into Ambika at most of the places, interjected voluminous and huge praises of Durga in between and are passing it of as a separate Devi Mahatmya scripture. Some versions do include the Mahlaxmi portion, but the huge and voluminous praises interpersed in between make it very difficult to connect the first portion with the second portion. And the second portion of Mahalaxmi now looks like a separate Vaishnavite insertion into an otherwise Saivite scripture. Take a version of Devi Mahatmya or Chandipath that includes the Mahalaxmi portion (many versions do not include the Mahalaxmi portion), remove the voluminous and huge praises of Durga, isolate the two portions, remove and replace the name of Ambika with Narayani and read the two portions together. It is all plain simple common sense. No one has ever applied such simple common sense because is has been accepted ever since they saw some seals in Harappa that Saivism and Shaktism predate Vaishnavism. So no one has ever thought on whether Vaishnavism predates Saivism. The minute it is proven that Vaishnavism predates Saivism, all historial models ever posited across the world will collapse, because all those arcaheological sites of India, one of them dated to 13000 BP, belong to Indo-European people. The book has been sent to a professional critique in US and it has been suggested that the book be targeted not at historians but all people because almost anyone would be interested in reading the book. So I am posting here to get the reaction of common people. Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hindustani Posted March 27, 2009 Report Share Posted March 27, 2009 Absolute FALSE statements. Science has proved that while blowing word Oum into a machine which produces waves,similar pattern of Shri Sriyantra imerge out of it!Now tell me IF Oum is a patent word for any sampradaya. Let me talk about the famous Ambaji shrine in <?xml:namespace prefix = o /> In an earlier chapter, I have already given a detailed explanation on Sri Yantra. It is the yantra of Goddess Laxmi. So a worship of Sri Yantra can only be done in a Vaishnavite shrine and not in a Saivite one. The claim that the yantra belongs to some Saivite Goddess Sri Vidya who then gave it to Laxmi because the Saivite Goddess was propitiated by Laxmi - at least from historical perspective, does not stick through. Incidentally, the Goddess is also called as Ambika Bhadra, and Bhadra Purnima is celebrated in a major way at the temple. Bhadra is one of the names of Laxmi in Markandeya Purana, considered to be the bible of Mother Goddess worship. It is likely to have been the name of the deity of a sect that integrated itself into Mahalaxmi in Treta Yuga. I was wondering as to where this sect had vanished, as we hardly find any temples of Bhadra. Chances are that this was a Goddess Bhadra shrine, and they worshiped Goddess Bhadra in the form a Sri Yantra. It is also possible that Sri Yantra originally belonged to this sect of Bhadra worshipers, and after they integrated into Laxmi, their yantra came to be known as Sri Yantra. It was a Vaishnavite shrine for more than seven to eight thousand years before it was converted recently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.