Saivism invaded/migrated into India, not Vaishnavism; Indian history 19000 years old

[prithvi]

Yes. OM belongs to Vaishnavism. The Vaishnavite kingom of Sril Lanka (The fundamental concepts of Vaishnavism came from Sri Lanka. I have shown this detailedly in the book) was exceptionally advanced 12000 years ago - It had aeroplanes, this is confirmed not just by Ramayan but archaeological evidence as well. They were, in a sense, ruling the world at that point of time. So it is not beyond them to know that OM sound creates Sri Yantra - they had technology enough to know that. You would get complete explanation for all Hindu symbols in the chapter "Sages and Symbols" on my blog at http://19000years.blogspot.com. Saivite Goddess Sri Vidya, the Saivite affiliation with Sri Yantra, was conceptualized around 3000 years ago; before that time, there was no Sri Vidya. How do I know this? through common sense only, I assure you.

 

The book involved super human levels of research of several years, so I may not be able to explain each and every concept in this just one thread. I wanted to take feedback on the fundamental concepts; So I am contacting several people, including professional historians, to get their feedback. My professional critique, an American, gave the following feedback about the -

 

"This is a good piece of work and I can see it becoming great. This manuscript is interesting. Not only is the idea a good one; many readers will be able to relate to this material. Many, many readers will benefit from reading this material, and they will thank you for writing this manuscript. I am impressed with your knowledge of this material and the way that you have presented this information. You have put a great deal of work and thought into this manuscript and the readers will greatly appreciate it. You have brought up many interesting points and there will be many informative, interesting, and intellectual discussions over this work Nicely done. This material will be memorable for years to come. I sincerely wish you luck with this endeavor. "

 

So if you find value in the concepts, please pass on the blog address to others.

 

Thanks

[Kali_Upasaka]

Sri Vidya is not a Goddess.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sri_Vidya

[Kali_Upasaka]

Drawing of Sri Yantra

 

http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/george/yantra.html

 

Photographs of Sri Yantra

 

http://www.junemoon.com/gallery/room8.html

[hindustani]

Oh I never knew this,perhaps you should go for copyright for it,you may also include vedas,puranas etc.

 

Yes. OM belongs to Vaishnavism.

Well I am not of those who accept anything seeing some western people signed the documents,sorry not my cup of tea.

 

My professional critique, an American, gave the following feedback about the -

 

[Durgaputra]

 

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

Dear Prthvi,

I see that you are reading this like a story and trying to take what you think is an exclusive Vaishnava view on this. This is not the view of those who use this text for religious practice OR know this text well. You understand the words - maybe- but you do not understand the story. I do not see any Vaishnava OR Shaiva OR any such sectarian position in the Devi Mahatmyam. You really are missing the wood for the trees. The vedic religion, predates any of the modern sects. Have you bothered reading any of the Vedas and tried to understand ?

 

The US guy is right in that - if you want to sell books, then any controversy will do and this is the right path. But if it is the truth that you are bothered about, then I dont think you are on the right path. I personally find your conclusions hillarious, especially when you insist that we will not understand your research. The example you quoted is clearly a bit of wild speculation, since you dont seem to understand it.

 

Especially since I saw your wonderful assertation that "OM" is owned by Vaishnava:rofl:, I am not going to waste my time on pointless discussion with you....

[prithvi]

<<Especially since I saw your wonderful assertation that "OM" is owned by Vaishnava, I am not going to waste my time on pointless discussion with you.... >>The presence of U shaped symbol with dot in it inside the OM symbol itself is an indication to OM being a Vaishnavite symbol. Further, with the help of archaeological evidence at Omkareswar shrine, it can be shown that OM is a Vaishnavite symol. << if you want to sell books, then any controversy will do and this is the right path. >>I have a chapter in the book about Siva shrines being Vaishnavite shrines earlier, where I earlier covered more than thirty Siva shrines. However, my only intention was to write history, not to generate controversy. So I have now removed most of the evidence and I am now covering only about half of those. I can write about five hundred pages just to show that Vaishnaivsm precedes Saivism. But I have removed more than half of the content and I am now presenting only minimal evidence that is just about sufficient. If you call that selling controversy, it is fine. <<I see that you are reading this like a story and trying to take what you think is an exclusive Vaishnava view on this. >>You cannot write Indian history by reading bible, right? Vaishnavite theology precedes Saivite theology by nine thousand years; there is huge amount evidence available in this regard. You need to take a Vaishnavite viewpoint to understand Indian history. Vaishnavite theology has in itself become a big joke now. Ram, Krishna, and Buddha are considered Vishnu's incarnations because Vishnu is the preserver - this itself is a very big joke. Did Vishnu come and tell anyone that he incarnated because he is preserver. Saivism is not averse to incarnations- Sankaracharya has been declared as Siva's incarnation; and Linga purana talks about 28 incarnations of Siva, four more than any Vishnu incarnations. When Kabir died, there was a fight between muslims and hindus about Kabir's legacy. Similarly, if Saivism was present at the time of Ram, Krishna or Buddha, there would have been a fight between the Saivites and Vaishnavites with each sect claiming that they are the incarnations of their own God. There was never any fight because Vaishnavism was the only religion of India even at the time of Buddha about 3800 years ago. Saivism came into its own only after Sankaracharya, in the last two millennia. <....is is not the view of those who use this text for religious practice OR know this text well. You understand the words - maybe- but you do not understand the story. I do not see any Vaishnava OR Shaiva OR any such sectarian position in the Devi Mahatmyam. You really are missing the wood for the trees.>>Devi Mahatmya is not such a big scripture that you need to ask people who use it to draw conclusions about it. After discussing so much about Devi Mahatmya, Kali_Upasaka has not even bothered to acknowledge the evidence that I presented; he now wants to talk about a new topic on whether Sri Vidya is a Goddess or a concept - any God or Goddess is only a concept, in heavens there is no separae Vaikunt from Kailas. Now the question is about whetehr I have read Vedas, which precede Vaishnavism - I have already written in one of the earlier posts that Vaishnavites inserted Purusha Sukta and Sri Sukta into Vedas that already existed. The vedas that we are so proud of are nothing but war hymns - please read "Rig Veda: The Rise of Aryans" by Nigam. If the evidence presented here about Devi Mahatmya is not sufficient for you, then no amount of evidence would be sufficient for you. Fine. Even I am not very eager to convince each and every person. As a researcher, I am worried about any obvious mistakes; I wanted to see if any glaring mistakes would be found; I see that a good number of people read the content in this thread for the last three weeks but no one has pointed out any glaring mistakes. Thanks

[prithvi]

<<Especially since I saw your wonderful assertation that "OM" is owned by Vaishnava, I am not going to waste my time on pointless discussion with you.... >>

The presence of U shaped symbol with dot in it inside the OM symbol itself is an indication to OM being a Vaishnavite symbol. Further, with the help of archaeological evidence at Omkareswar shrine, it can be shown that OM is a Vaishnavite symol.

[prithvi]

<< if you want to sell books, then any controversy will do and this is the right path. >>

 

I have a chapter in the book about Siva shrines being Vaishnavite shrines earlier, where I earlier covered more than thirty Siva shrines. However, my only intention was to write history, not to generate controversy. So I have now removed most of the evidence and I am now covering only about half of those. I can write about five hundred pages just to show that Vaishnaivsm precedes Saivism. But I have removed more than half of the content and I am now presenting only minimal evidence that is just about sufficient. If you call that selling controversy, it is fine.

 

<< I see that you are reading this like a story and trying to take what you think is an exclusive Vaishnava view on this. >>

 

You cannot write Indian history by reading bible, right? Vaishnavite theology precedes Saivite theology by nine thousand years; there is huge amount evidence available in this regard. You need to take a Vaishnavite viewpoint to understand Indian history.

 

Vaishnavite theology has in itself become a big joke now. Ram, Krishna, and Buddha are considered Vishnu's incarnations because Vishnu is the preserver - this itself is a very big joke. Did Vishnu come and tell anyone that he incarnated because he is preserver. Saivism is not averse to incarnations- Sankaracharya has been declared as Siva's incarnations; and Linga purana talks about 28 incarnations of Siva, four more than any Vishnu incarnations. When Kabir died, there was a fight between muslis and hindus about Kabir's legacy. Similarly, if Saivism was present at the time of Ram, Krishna or Buddha, there would have been a fight between the Saivites and Vaishnavites with each sect claiming that they are the incarnations of their own God. There was never any fight because Vaishnavism was the only religion of India even at the time of Buddha about 3800 years ago. Saivism came into its own only after Sankaracharya, in the last two millennia.

 

<< This is not the view of those who use this text for religious practice OR know this text well. You understand the words - maybe- but you do not understand the story. I do not see any Vaishnava OR Shaiva OR any such sectarian position in the Devi Mahatmyam. You really are missing the wood for the trees. >>

 

Devi Mahatmya is not such a big scripture that you need to ask people who use it to draw conclusions about it. After discussing so much about Devi Mahatmya, Kali_Upasaka has not even bothered to acknowledge the evidence that I presented; he now wants to talk about a new topic on whether Sri Vidya is a Goddess or a concept - any God or Goddess is only a concept, in heavens there is no separae Vaikunta from Kailas. Now the question is about whetehr I have read Vedas, which precede Vaishnavism - I have already written in one of the earlier posts that Vaishnavites inserted Purusha Sukta and Sri Sukta into Vedas that already existed. The vedas that we are so proud of are nothing but war hymns - please read "Rig Veda: The Rise of Aryans" by Nigam.

 

If the evidence presented here about Devi Mahatmya is not sufficient for you, then no amount of evidence would be sufficient for you. Fine. Even I am not very eager to convince each and every person. As a researcher, I am worried about any obvious mistakes; I wanted to see if any glaring mistakes would be found; I see that a good number of people read the content in this thread for the last three weeks but no one has pointed out any glaring mistakes.

 

Thanks

[prithvi]

I got a few queries about the book to my mail box. This book is not just about Hinduism. It reveals lot of new evidence about Zoroastrianism, Judaism, Christianity and Buddhism as well. The book is being published by an American publisher and will be available on all major online bookstores in about a month's time, including Amazon, Barnes and Noble, Alibris and others.

[sambya]

i read through the thread and found the entire thing very laughable . i can continue aguing with you for hours on end but do not have the slightest inclination to do so right now . because such things have already been discussed repeteadly in this forum and im begining to have have serious doubts about your genuinity as a resercher . what you are writting in the posts show nothing of research but of hapazard joining of historical puzzles as per your own beliefs and understandings.

 

i think you would agree that the psycology of the writer shines through his writings . reading your posts it is evident that you are actually a practising vaishnava who wishes to glorify your belief over the rest . and in the process you have chosen this so-called 'historical approach' .

 

incidentaly all your posts shows a striking absence of citations . as a reasearch book i must say its rather bad , or useless . im sorry for using harsh words , but i guess it will make you adapted to what shall be coming in as reviews after publishing it.

[sambya]

 

The presence of U shaped symbol with dot in it inside the OM symbol itself is an indication to OM being a Vaishnavite symbol. Further, with the help of archaeological evidence at Omkareswar shrine, it can be shown that OM is a Vaishnavite symol.

ha ha ha !!!

 

the u shaped symbol with a dot inside it constitutes for merely a small part of the total symbol . what about the rest of it ?? was that interpolation ??!!

 

archeological evidence ?? ha ha ha ........ ever visited ASI office ?

 

youre a loser !!!

 

but i pity you and have full support and compassion . i understand that you were probably a high school dropout and have to do something to eat and survive . full support and appreciation to your book , lest you die of hunger . best of luck:P

 

 

 

[prithvi]

<< the u shaped symbol with a dot inside it constitutes for merely a small part of the total symbol . what about the rest of it ?? was that interpolation ??!! >>

 

OM represents Pancha Brahmatmika forces emanating from Narayan. I have given a pretty detailed explanation of this in the chapter "Sages and Symbols," given on my blog. I have mentioned about this chapter on my blog in an earlier post also. You have not bothered to go and read, but want to abuse me in every possible way. I have given about Vedas also in one of the chapters on the blog; despite that, people on this thread keep asking me on whether I bothered to research into Vedas. This is why I stopped arguing on this thread - I wanted to argue only with those who have completely read the book - otherwise, there will only be questions - do you know this? do you know that? you are saying this, I laugh at you?

 

You are talking about references - what references do you need? All that I talked about in this thread is in public domain. Go get a few books about piligrimages and you would get all information about shrines. Go get an old version of Chandipath and you would get all information about chandipath. Tell me about one bit of information that is not in public domain and I shall provide reference for that. It is only the interpretation that defers, not information. It only requires a will to look at the reality, not information; information has always been staring at us for so long.

 

I understand your frustration and your abuses. I would behave in the same way if I were in your place.

 

I am not going to respond to any "do you know this" or "do you know that" kind of questions or abuses. If you find any loopholes in the data, please let me know. Otherwise you can consider the thread to be closed. Thanks

[sambya]

 

You have not bothered to go and read, but want to abuse me in every possible way. I have given about Vedas also in one of the chapters on the blog; despite that, people on this thread keep asking me on whether I bothered to research into Vedas.

 

honestly im trying to read through the remaining upanishads , chaitanya charitamrita and a few other highly important books . do you really believe that yours is even superior that ive to waste my precious time in reading that ?

 

i think by now you have understood what response your book would get from readers . make merry and be happy . good luck ....

[prithvi]

Thanks Sambya, best of luck for your future.

[abmind]

Hello Prithvi,

 

Any book is to be written subjectively but not objectively. As per your statements I can think your writing is based on a sponsered objective. Unfortunately that will not help you in any way as you have lost precious time of your life for a twisted truth. Before commenting anything on your writings, can you elaborate,

 

What are the Hindu scriptures you read before writing this book?

 

The cosmic sound OM or AUM is the driving force of this universe. This subtle acoustic spectrum is the enregy driving all these planets and universe. Our ancient seers with their divine knowledge forsaw this sound and told us. Till today scientists with their X-ray telescopes could not spot the sound but claiming this as CMB originated during Big Bang. Before, they claimed entire universe is vacuum and sound will not travel. We should feel proud about our ancients who gave us a valuable indepth understanding. They advise us to recite the same sound which can energize our cell beings as we are the representation of microcosmic being. Your staement looks so childish to claim that "OM" is the property of Vishnava sampradaya.

 

Also When demon Ravanasura was alive he used to pray Shiva being the Supreme God as his god and treat Vishnu as his rival? Then when this Vaishnavism migrated to SriLanka?

[prithvi]

<< What are the Hindu scriptures you read before writing this book? >>

 

If you care to read my blog, you would know. But since you anyway consider that it is a twisted book, you would not want to do it. So, just let us stick to whatever has been discussed in this thread.

 

<< The cosmic sound OM or AUM is the driving force of this universe. This subtle acoustic spectrum is the enregy driving all these planets and universe. Our ancient seers with their divine knowledge forsaw this sound and told us. Till today scientists with their X-ray telescopes could not spot the sound but claiming this as CMB originated during Big Bang. Before, they claimed entire universe is vacuum and sound will not travel. We should feel proud about our ancients who gave us a valuable indepth understanding. They advise us to recite the same sound which can energize our cell beings as we are the representation of microcosmic being. Your staement looks so childish to claim that "OM" is the property of Vishnava sampradaya. >>

 

Big bang is out of scope for any historian. Our forefathers originated from Africa from a group called HomoSapiens, about fifty thousand years ago. From there they migrated to all corners of the globe including India. At that time, they certainly did not have a knowledge of OM. They came to know about OM only recently. And if two sects exist with one sect preceding the other by several thousand years, it is common sense to draw a conclusion that the knowledge was first known to the older sect.

 

<< Also When demon Ravanasura was alive he used to pray Shiva being the Supreme God as his god and treat Vishnu as his rival? Then when this Vaishnavism migrated to SriLanka? >>

 

Which Ramayan are you talking about? Ramayan was written and re-written over a hundred times in the last nine thousand years. Each time, new flavors and new legends were added to it. The original Valmiki version showed Siva in an extremely inferior light. It talks about a war between Vishnu and Siva, in which Vishnu wins easily. The original version does not talk anything about Ram and Ravan worshipping Siva. In fact Saivism was not even present in South India at the time of Ram. Dravidians migrated to South India from Gujarat after being displaced by Great Drought of 2200 BC, which lasted three centuries. They traveled through Maharashtra, Karnataka, Andhra, and finally Tamilnadu. These five places are therefore called Pancha Dravidas.

[abmind]

 

 

<IF to p do my not is that since you a this us in thread. discussed been has whatever stick let just So, it. want would book, twisted it consider anyway But know. blog, read care quote]< [>If you care to read my blog, you would know. But since you anyway consider that it is a twisted book, you would not want to do it. So, just let us stick to whatever has been discussed in this thread.

I read it. Your puranic interpretation is not valid.

 

 

Big bang is out of scope for any historian. Our forefathers originated from Africa from a group called HomoSapiens, about fifty thousand years ago. From there they migrated to all corners of the globe including India. At that time, they certainly did not have a knowledge of OM. They came to know about OM only recently. And if two sects exist with one sect preceding the other by several thousand years, it is common sense to draw a conclusion that the knowledge was first known to the older sect.

 

Well.. If you go by History to understand religion, you have to wait another few thousand years. Because Hindu religious writings are prehistoric and the origin was time immortal. I am surprised how can you claim Vimanas were used in Lanka basing on History. Can you provide some archelogical references.

 

 

Which Ramayan are you talking about? Ramayan was written and re-written over a hundred times in the last nine thousand years. Each time, new flavors and new legends were added to it. The original Valmiki version showed Siva in an extremely inferior light. It talks about a war between Vishnu and Siva, in which Vishnu wins easily. The original version does not talk anything about Ram and Ravan worshipping Siva. In fact Saivism was not even present in South India at the time of Ram. Dravidians migrated to South India from Gujarat after being displaced by Great Drought of 2200 BC, which lasted three centuries. They traveled through Maharashtra, Karnataka, Andhra, and finally Tamilnadu. These five places are therefore called Pancha Dravidas.

 

It is funny. Go to South India and compare the traditions among Dravidians with that of Gujaraties. You find the differences.

 

Ravanausra is a devoted Shivaite and he observed severe penace for Shiva. Your rejection is ridiculous.

 

Any how, good luck with your book.

[prithvi]

<< I read it. Your puranic interpretation is not valid.

Well.. If you go by History to understand religion, you have to wait another few thousand years. Because Hindu religious writings are prehistoric and the origin was time immortal. >>

 

There are two kinds of people - one who think religion exists since time immortal, and another who think that religion started sometime back in history. The opinion of these two kinds of people is completely opposite to each other and they should never argue with each other. Do you really think we should argue with each other? Frankly speaking, I do not want to argue with you; but I do not want to sound rude, so I shall answer your other questions.

 

<< I am surprised how can you claim Vimanas were used in Lanka basing on History. Can you provide some archelogical references. >>

 

Scientists have found an ancient TESLA grid used for powering aircraft. At first they thought that this grid might belong to the legendary Atlantis, believed to have submerged into atlantic ocean. However, to their surprise, they found the image carved at one of the places in Canada to be that of an Indian, indicating to us that this grid could belong to Indians. Our ancestors had a knowledge of aircraft; Ramayan is not lying to us when it tells us about Pushpak Viman carrying Ram from Lanka to Ayodhya. Here is the reference -

 

http://www.themystica.org/mystica/articles/a/atlantis_power_grid.html

 

<< It is funny. Go to South India and compare the traditions among Dravidians with that of Gujaraties. You find the differences. Ravanausra is a devoted Shivaite and he observed severe penace for Shiva. Your rejection is ridiculous. >>

 

I have not invented the concept of Pancha Dravidas. It is well known amongst knowledgeable Dravidians. In fact, I came to know about it through a tamil friend of mine. He came to me and told me that Siva worship was pretty dominant all along the west coast of India, along Gujarat, Maharashtra and Karnataka, because all these regions are Dravidian regions. Thats when I came to know about Pancha Dravidas. Though it is generally known amongst the erudite, not much research has gone into it; so you would not get any scholarly references. One explanation for this is that Dravidians used to live in Gujarat, aryans came and invaded them and pushed them to south; they then traveled through Maharashtra, karnataka, andhra to Tamilnadu. However, aryan invasion theory is now dead, so we need to provide an alternative explanation. However, after the recent demise of AIT, not much research has gone into this concept of pancha dravidas and no one has bothered to provide an alternate explanation. As per me, there was an extremely aridic drought period of three hundred years that devastated Indian civilization around 2200 BC (I have not invented this, this drought is well known to all historians and geologists, though they have not realized its significance). It is my firm opinion that Dravidians were displaced by this drought from Gujarat. They then came to South India through the Pancha Dravida regions. I have dealt with this topic extensively in the book. Here is some discussion that goes on about Pancha Dravidas -

 

http://forumhub.com/tlit/15496.27572.06.19.32.html

[abmind]

 

Frankly speaking, I do not want to argue with you;

 

I think that is a good idea. I too feel same.

 

Best Regards.

 

abmind

[prithvi]

Hi abmind

 

I did not want to argue with you not because I do not respect your opinions, but because the views of creationists and historians will never converge even they argue for hundred years. Well, thanks for your insights and best of luck.

 

Regards

 

Prithvi

[prithvi]

I just wanted to clarify on this Ravan worshipping Siva thing. Ravan worshipping Siva is purely of later origin and has nothing to do with original Ramayan. The legend of the temple at Gokarna of Karnataka tells us about this. Here is an excerpt from my book regarding this shrine -

 

We come to Gokarna, considered to be the holiest Siva shrine in the state of Karnataka. Localites consider it to be holier than Kasi itself. The temple is supposed to hold an atma linga. Atma means soul. So atma linga means the very essence of Siva is present in the linga here. The legend of the temple is as follows –

 

"Once Ravan, the antagonist of Ram, propitiated Siva and obtained his atma linga. He was on his way to Lanka to get it installed there. Siva tells him that the linga should not be dropped anywhere until he reaches Lanka; if he does so, the linga would stay put wherever it is dropped. Devas are worried that the demon would become invincible if he is allowed to take the atma linga of Siva. He needs to be stopped from taking it. They request Ganesh and Vishnu to block Ravan. Vishnu blocks the Sun and makes the world dark. As it has become dark, being a Brahmin, Ravan considers it necessary to perform his evening rites. There appears Ganesh there in the form of a small shepherd boy. Ravan calls him and requests him to hold the linga for a few minutes, while he does his rites. As soon as Ganesh receives the linga, he puts it down and vanishes. Atma linga got put there; the more Ravan tried, the more it went deep into the earth; because of his efforts, it even got twisted because of which it now resembles the shape of a cow’s ear; this is the reason why the place got called as Gokarna, which menas cow’s ear. Today, the atma linga is visible just three inches above the ground."

 

And the most important thing is that this linga is encased in a square Saligram! Saligram is extremely sacred for Vaishnavites, and they consider it as a manifestation of Vishnu himself. This is evidence that it was a probably Vaishnavite shrine before being converted into Saivism. Ravan, the opponent of Ram in Ramayan, lived in Treta Yuga, and Dravidians started moving into these parts from Gujarat in Kali Yuga. I am not so confident that Ravan had anything to do with the shrine. The tank of water near the temple is called Koti Theertham; people take a dip in the shrine before visiting the temple. A dip in the tank is considered purifying, and pilgrims perform rituals for departed souls after bathing in the tank. And this is a tank that is believed to have been created by Vishnu’s vehicle Garuda. A dip is taken in a Vaishnavite tank before a Saligram Siva is worshiped! Incidentally, there is Vaishnavite legend associated with the place. Vishnu, after killing the thousand-armed Banasur, performed penance here. On the south side of the tank, there is another Vishnu shrine. And there are many other Vaishnavite shrines nearby, including a Ram temple. Vishnu, Ravan, Saligram, Garuda – all of these tell us about extremely strong Vaishnavite connections.

 

As per a rarely given legend, Siva performed penance at this spot inside the netherworld. Mother earth took the form a cow and Siva emerged from her ear. Because of this, the place is called Gokarna. It is too much of an extraordinary coincidence that Siva and Vishnu perform penance at exactly the same spot; only one of these legends is likely to have been original. Given the Vaishnavite association of Garuda and Saligram, it is not unreasonable to assume that the Vaishnavite legend must have been the original one. The original legend must have been that Vishnu did penance and came out of cow’s ear; therefore the place was called Gokarna. Vaishnavites chanced upon a Saligram, embedded into the earth in the form of Cow’s ear. They hold Saligram very sacred; so they came up with this legend that Vishnu did penance inside the earth and came out through cow’s ear. After Saivites took over, they changed the legend to mean that Siva came out of the earth after doing penance. However, this created a confusion with the the legend of Vishnu’s penance; so they changed the legend to that of Ravan. The legend of Siva’s penance is rarely given by sources; most sources avoid giving this legend because it creates a confusion with the penance legend of Vishnu. The most sacred Siva shrine of Karnataka could be a converted Vaishnavite shrine telling us that Vaishnavism preceded Saivism in the region of Karnataka.