Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 43

Thread: Roots of Shakti.

  1. #11

    Re: Roots of Shakti.

    Quote Originally Posted by Alter ego View Post
    Yes , Vedic gods have blond hair(Indra/bhaga etc..) .Though Vedic Brahmins predominantly had black hair , there are many references of blonde Brahmins [patanjali's pingalakeshin(=blond hair),hiranyakeshin(=golden hair) of srauta sutras ] etc. However , there is no racism at all anywhere in Rigveda.

    The more race conscious Buddhist scriptures provide many glimpses. Buddhacharita(23.2) says--"Brahmins of uncorrupted caste have blue eyes and blond hair " . Many blond Brahmins are mentioned in Buddhist scriptures namely-Kapila, sariputra , maudgalayana , megha and others . Pramanavartikatika (A commentary on aforesaid scriptures) says absence of such features is a sign of intermixing. Buddha suggested that black haired Brahmins dye their hair colour.

    However , the absence of these notions in rigveda confirms beyond any doubt that Rigvedic society was tolerant , multicultural and egalitarian .
    Namaste,

    I do not mean to digress from the OP, but: regarding Shri Indra having blond hair, as per my assessment, is only a half-truth (and about Shri Bhaga, I am unfamiliar on the matter pertaining to him). A Shrutic revelation states that Shri Indra comes in many forms, that these forms are of the yajamāna-s' calling:

    For each and every form he is the Model,
    it is his form that is to be seen everywhere;
    Indra by his charm (māyā) moves in many forms,
    truly, his bay steeds are yoked a thousand times.”
    –ṚV 6.47.18.

    And, we must remember that another revelation, I don't recall the verse number, expresses that Shri Indra dyed both his hair and beard blond with Soma residue. This was symbolic: reiterating the duality of Indra-Soma. In fact, it is usually the solar Solar-Deities such as Shri Mitra and Shri Savitar that are described as "blond" or "golden", which is theologically and observably sensible and understandable. And, correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't "pingala" mean light brown?

    Another important point relevant to the "theological colorism" (not to be confused with societal colorism, a subset of racism) at hand:

    Shri Rudra has dark brown skin, but has golden colored arms and hair. Sometimes, he is described as white as camphor. Are you, by any chance, familiar with this? I am not theologically aware of the relevance of the colorism of Shri Rudra in this case.

    And, Rishi Agastya, who is of the same "stock" as that of Rishi Vasishtha, has always been known for is extremely dark skin tone. Yet, the two are always eulogized as sons of Shri Mitra and Shri Varuna.

    Lastly, I agree that the Rig Vedic society was egalitarian. The theological aspects of the last hymn of the Shri Rg-Veda confirm this assessment: "may we be of one accord and offer the common oblation [as brothers]" (<-- paraphrased for convenience).

    Quote Originally Posted by Aryavartian View Post
    Yes,i am aware of Sri Aditi and Sri Ushas,there is no doubt that they are invoked as highly adored Goddesses.But my question was about Pravati(or Shakti) in general.I don't think either Aditi nor Ushas is equated with Parvati..
    Namaste,

    I am unfamiliar with the topic above. Thus, I made an attempt, instead, by answering your first two questions: "Namaste everyone,we know that Vaishnavism and Shaivism have its origins in Vedic corpus but what about Shaktism?Did the worship of Shakti exist during the Vedic era?" regarding Shaktism and its probable connection to the Vedic scriptures.
    Last edited by Sudas Paijavana; 16 January 2014 at 10:36 AM.

  2. #12

    Re: Roots of Shakti.

    Quote Originally Posted by Alter ego View Post
    Yes , Vedic gods have blond hair(Indra/bhaga etc..) .Though Vedic Brahmins predominantly had black hair , there are many references of blonde Brahmins [patanjali's pingalakeshin(=blond hair),hiranyakeshin(=golden hair) of srauta sutras ] etc. However , there is no racism at all anywhere in Rigveda.

    The more race conscious Buddhist scriptures provide many glimpses. Buddhacharita(23.2) says--"Brahmins of uncorrupted caste have blue eyes and blond hair " . Many blond Brahmins are mentioned in Buddhist scriptures namely-Kapila, sariputra , maudgalayana , megha and others . Pramanavartikatika (A commentary on aforesaid scriptures) says absence of such features is a sign of intermixing. Buddha suggested that black haired Brahmins dye their hair colour.

    However , the absence of these notions in rigveda confirms beyond any doubt that Rigvedic society was tolerant , multicultural and egalitarian .
    Hmmmm....but Atharva Veda says Brahmanas had black hair.It even have a mantra to grow thick black hair.

    Also i searched the so called verse in Buddhacharita about ancient neo-nazi concept ,it seems that the texts does not have a 23rd chapter!

    http://www.dsbcproject.org/node/7224
    "Only one is the fire,which is inflamed in numerous ways.Only one is the sun, which pervades the whole universe.Only one is the dawn,which illuminates all things. Similarly,all that exists is The One and it has manifested into everything here.”

    ~ Rg Veda 8.58.2

  3. #13
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    bhUloka
    Posts
    250
    Rep Power
    358

    Re: Roots of Shakti.

    Quote Originally Posted by Alter ego View Post
    I am not sure what you mean by 'Vedic corpus'. Goddess shri is absent in vedas.
    What? If lakShmI devI is not mentioned, then could you please explain exactly what लक्ष्मी॑ (lakShmI) is supposed to refer to in following verses from the shrI sUktam of the R^igveda khilAni:
    हि॑रण्यवर्णां ह॑रिणीं सुव॑र्णरजत॑स्रजाम्।
    चन्द्रां हिर॑ण्मयीं लक्ष्मीं जा॑तवेदो म॑मा॑वह॥२.६.१॥
    ता॑म्म आ॑वह जातवेदो लक्ष्मी॑म॑नपगामि॑नीम्।
    य॑स्यां हि॑रण्यं विन्दे॑यं गा॑म॑श्वंपु॑रुषानह॑म्॥२.६.२॥
    अश्वपूर्वां रथमध्यां हस्ति॑नादप्रमोदि॑नीम्।
    श्रि॑यं देवी॑मु॑प ह्वये श्री॑र्मा देवी॑जुषताम्॥२.६.३॥
    कांस्य॑स्मि तां हि॑रण्यप्रावारामार्द्रा॑ञ्ज्व॑लन्तीं तृप्तां तर्प॑यन्तीम्।
    पद्मेस्तिथां पद्म॑वर्णां ता॑मिहो॑प ह्वये श्रि॑यम्॥२.६.४॥
    चन्द्रां प्रभासां य्यश॑सा ज्व॑लन्तीं श्रि॑यं ल्लोके॑देव॑जुष्टामुदारा॑म्।
    ता॑म्पद्म॑नेमिं श॑रणं प्र॑पद्ये अलक्ष्मी॑र्मे नश्यतां त्वां वृणोमि॥२.६.५॥
    आदित्य॑वर्णे त॑पसो॑धि जातो॑व॑नस्प॑तिस्त॑व वृक्षो॑थ॑बिल्वः ।
    त॑स्य फ॑लानि त॑पसा॑नुदन्तु माया॑न्तरा या॑श्च बाह्या॑अलक्ष्मीः॥२.६.६॥
    उ॑पैतु मान्देवसख॑ ᳲकीर्ति॑श्च म॑णिना सह॑।
    प्रादु॑र्भूतो॑स्मि रा॑ष्ट्रेस्मि॑न्कीर्तिं वृद्धिं ददातु मे॥२.६.७॥
    क्षु॑त्पिपासा॑मला ज्येष्ठा॑मलक्ष्मी॑न्नाशयाम्य॑हम्।
    अ॑भूतिम॑समृद्धिं च स॑र्वान्नि॑र्णुद मे गॄहात्॥२.६.८॥
    ग॑न्धद्वारां दुरा॑धर्षां नित्य॑पुष्टां करीषि॑णीम्।
    ई॑श्वरीं स॑र्वभूतानान्ता॑मिहो॑प ह्वये श्रि॑यम्॥२.६.९॥
    म॑नस ᳲका॑ममा॑कूतिं व्वाच॑स्सत्य॑मशीमहि ।
    पशू॑नां रूप॑म॑न्नस्य म॑यि श्री॑श्श्रयतां य्य॑शः॥२.६.१०॥
    कर्दमेन॑प्रजा भूता॑म॑यि स॑म्भव क॑र्दम ।
    श्रि॑यं व्वास॑य मे कुले॑मात॑रं पद्ममालि॑नीम्॥२.६.११॥
    आ॑प स्रवन्तु स्नि॑ग्धानि चि॑क्लीता व॑स मे गृहे॑।
    नि॑च देवी॑म्मात॑रं श्रि॑यं व्वास॑य मे कुले॑॥२.६.१२॥
    पक्वां पुष्क॑रिणीं पुष्टां पिङ्ग॑लां पद्ममालि॑नीम्।
    सूर्यां हिर॑ण्मयीं लक्ष्मीं जा॑तवेदो म॑मा॑वह॥२.६.१३॥
    आर्द्रां पुष्क॑रिणीं यष्टीं सुव॑र्णं हेममालि॑नीम्।
    चन्द्रां हिर॑ण्मयीं ल्लक्ष्मीं जा॑तवेदो म॑मा॑वह॥२.६.१४॥
    ता॑म्म आ॑वह जातवेदो लक्ष्मी॑म॑नपगामि॑नीम्।
    य॑स्यां हि॑रण्यं प्र॑भूतं गा॑वो दास्यो॑विन्दे॑यं पु॑रुषानह॑म्॥२.६.१५॥
    य आनन्दं समा॑विशदुपा॑धावन्विभा॑वसुम्।
    श्रि॑यस्स॑र्वा उपा॑सिष्व चि॑क्लीत वस मे गृहे॑॥२.६.१६॥
    कर्दमेन॑प्रजा स्रष्टा॑सम्भू॑तिं गमयामसि ।
    अ॑दधादु॑पागाद्ये॑षां का॑मां ससृज्म॑हे॥२.६.१७॥
    जा॑तवेद ᳲपुनीहि॑मा राय॑स्पो॑षं च धारय ।
    अग्नि॑र्मा त॑स्मादे॑नसो विश्वा॑न्मुञ्चत्वंहसः॥२.६.१८॥
    Edit: Also keep in mind that it even says "श्रि॑यं देवी॑मु॑पह्वये" (shrIyaMdevImupahvaye)
    Last edited by Jaskaran Singh; 16 January 2014 at 03:22 AM.
    படைபோர் புக்கு முழங்கும்அப் பாஞ்சசன்னியமும் பல்லாண்டே
    May your pA~nchajanya shankha which reverberates on the battlefield, last thousands upon thousands of years...
    http://archives.mirroroftomorrow.org...anchajanya.jpg

  4. #14

    Re: Roots of Shakti.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aryavartian View Post
    Hmmmm....but Atharva Veda says Brahmanas had black hair.It even have a mantra to grow thick black hair.

    Also i searched the so called verse in Buddhacharita about ancient neo-nazi concept ,it seems that the texts does not have a 23rd chapter!

    http://www.dsbcproject.org/node/7224
    And that is why I said they had PREDOMINANTLY black hair.


    About buddhacharita, I read it long back and it seems that my memory failed me in remembering verse numbers. So , I will get back to that in a moment.

    In the meantime , I will give you a reference to those "neo-Nazi" verses of buddhacharita-


    Grains of gold-- Tales of a Cosmopolitan Traveler By Gendun Chopel (page 131)

    http://books.google.co.in/books?id=X...ahmins&f=false

    Sudas,

    pingala=reddish-brown, tawny, yellow, gold-coloured etc..,.

    http://www.sanskritdictionary.com/piṅgala/135101/1

  5. #15

    Re: Roots of Shakti.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jaskaran Singh View Post
    What? If lakShmI devI is not mentioned, then could you please explain exactly what लक्ष्मी॑ (lakShmI) is supposed to refer to in following verses from the shrI sUktam of the R^igveda khilAni:
    हि॑रण्यवर्णां ह॑रिणीं सुव॑र्णरजत॑स्रजाम्।
    चन्द्रां हिर॑ण्मयीं लक्ष्मीं जा॑तवेदो म॑मा॑वह॥२.६.१॥
    ता॑म्म आ॑वह जातवेदो लक्ष्मी॑म॑नपगामि॑नीम्।
    य॑स्यां हि॑रण्यं विन्दे॑यं गा॑म॑श्वंपु॑रुषानह॑म्॥२.६.२॥
    अश्वपूर्वां रथमध्यां हस्ति॑नादप्रमोदि॑नीम्।
    श्रि॑यं देवी॑मु॑प ह्वये श्री॑र्मा देवी॑जुषताम्॥२.६.३॥
    कांस्य॑स्मि तां हि॑रण्यप्रावारामार्द्रा॑ञ्ज्व॑लन् ीं तृप्तां तर्प॑यन्तीम्।
    पद्मेस्तिथां पद्म॑वर्णां ता॑मिहो॑प ह्वये श्रि॑यम्॥२.६.४॥
    चन्द्रां प्रभासां य्यश॑सा ज्व॑लन्तीं श्रि॑यं ल्लोके॑देव॑जुष्टामुदारा॑म्।
    ता॑म्पद्म॑नेमिं श॑रणं प्र॑पद्ये अलक्ष्मी॑र्मे नश्यतां त्वां वृणोमि॥२.६.५॥
    आदित्य॑वर्णे त॑पसो॑धि जातो॑व॑नस्प॑तिस्त॑व वृक्षो॑थ॑बिल्वः ।
    त॑स्य फ॑लानि त॑पसा॑नुदन्तु माया॑न्तरा या॑श्च बाह्या॑अलक्ष्मीः॥२.६.६॥
    उ॑पैतु मान्देवसख॑ ᳲकीर्ति॑श्च म॑णिना सह॑।
    प्रादु॑र्भूतो॑स्मि रा॑ष्ट्रेस्मि॑न्कीर्तिं वृद्धिं ददातु मे॥२.६.७॥
    क्षु॑त्पिपासा॑मला ज्येष्ठा॑मलक्ष्मी॑न्नाशयाम्य॑हम्।
    अ॑भूतिम॑समृद्धिं च स॑र्वान्नि॑र्णुद मे गॄहात्॥२.६.८॥
    ग॑न्धद्वारां दुरा॑धर्षां नित्य॑पुष्टां करीषि॑णीम्।
    ई॑श्वरीं स॑र्वभूतानान्ता॑मिहो॑प ह्वये श्रि॑यम्॥२.६.९॥
    म॑नस ᳲका॑ममा॑कूतिं व्वाच॑स्सत्य॑मशीमहि ।
    पशू॑नां रूप॑म॑न्नस्य म॑यि श्री॑श्श्रयतां य्य॑शः॥२.६.१०॥
    कर्दमेन॑प्रजा भूता॑म॑यि स॑म्भव क॑र्दम ।
    श्रि॑यं व्वास॑य मे कुले॑मात॑रं पद्ममालि॑नीम्॥२.६.११॥
    आ॑प स्रवन्तु स्नि॑ग्धानि चि॑क्लीता व॑स मे गृहे॑।
    नि॑च देवी॑म्मात॑रं श्रि॑यं व्वास॑य मे कुले॑॥२.६.१२॥
    पक्वां पुष्क॑रिणीं पुष्टां पिङ्ग॑लां पद्ममालि॑नीम्।
    सूर्यां हिर॑ण्मयीं लक्ष्मीं जा॑तवेदो म॑मा॑वह॥२.६.१३॥
    आर्द्रां पुष्क॑रिणीं यष्टीं सुव॑र्णं हेममालि॑नीम्।
    चन्द्रां हिर॑ण्मयीं ल्लक्ष्मीं जा॑तवेदो म॑मा॑वह॥२.६.१४॥
    ता॑म्म आ॑वह जातवेदो लक्ष्मी॑म॑नपगामि॑नीम्।
    य॑स्यां हि॑रण्यं प्र॑भूतं गा॑वो दास्यो॑विन्दे॑यं पु॑रुषानह॑म्॥२.६.१५॥
    य आनन्दं समा॑विशदुपा॑धावन्विभा॑वसुम्।
    श्रि॑यस्स॑र्वा उपा॑सिष्व चि॑क्लीत वस मे गृहे॑॥२.६.१६॥
    कर्दमेन॑प्रजा स्रष्टा॑सम्भू॑तिं गमयामसि ।
    अ॑दधादु॑पागाद्ये॑षां का॑मां ससृज्म॑हे॥२.६.१७॥
    जा॑तवेद ᳲपुनीहि॑मा राय॑स्पो॑षं च धारय ।
    अग्नि॑र्मा त॑स्मादे॑नसो विश्वा॑न्मुञ्चत्वंहसः॥२.६.१८॥
    These are khilas , not ricas. This is from sri suktam in the rigveda khilani not rigveda samhita.That is why I asked him what exactly he means by 'Vedic corpus' . If his definition of Vedic corpus also includes all the commentaries/appendices (There are medieval and even modern commentaries/appendices ) , then Lakshmi is definitely there .
    Last edited by Alter ego; 16 January 2014 at 03:42 AM.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    bhUloka
    Posts
    250
    Rep Power
    358

    Re: Roots of Shakti.

    Quote Originally Posted by Alter ego View Post
    There are khilas , not ricas. This is from sri suktam in the rigveda khilani not rigveda samhita.That is why I asked him what exactly he means by 'Vedic corpus' . If his definition of Vedic corpus also includes all the commentaries (There are medieval and even modern commentaries) , then Lakshmi is definitely there .However , she is absent from the corpus written in Vedic Sanskrit.

    Shri suktam is written in classical Sanskrit and is dated to the post paninian period.
    Wikipedia disagrees (not that it's reliable, but still ):
    "The Khilani are a collection of 98 "apocryphal" hymns of the Rigveda, recorded in the Bāṣkala, but not in the Śākala shakha. They are late additions to the text of the Rigveda, but still belong to the "Mantra" period of Vedic Sanskrit."
    படைபோர் புக்கு முழங்கும்அப் பாஞ்சசன்னியமும் பல்லாண்டே
    May your pA~nchajanya shankha which reverberates on the battlefield, last thousands upon thousands of years...
    http://archives.mirroroftomorrow.org...anchajanya.jpg

  7. #17

    Re: Roots of Shakti.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jaskaran Singh View Post

    Wikipedia disagrees (not that it's reliable, but still ):
    "The Khilani are a collection of 98 "apocryphal" hymns of the Rigveda, recorded in the Bāṣkala, but not in the Śākala shakha. They are late additions to the text of the Rigveda, but still belong to the "Mantra" period of Vedic Sanskrit."
    Namaste,

    For colloquial reasons, I personally refer to this as the "Integrated ShAkala-BAshkala Edition*" - the Shri Rg-Veda we have currently.

    *For anyone that ever wondered: what in the world is Sudas talking about when he always writes this "Integrated Edition" stuff? Well, now you know.

    ps - Is the Purusha Sukta-m originally of the ShAkala/ShAkalya tradition or of BAshkala tradition? My PDF files in the Sanskrit of the two traditions are not opening right now. May someone please be kind as to confirm for me if the Purusha Sukta-m is found in both or just in one of them?

    Quote Originally Posted by Alter ego View Post
    Namaste,

    Both of them!
    Namaste,

    You are extremely sure, right?

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Dear OP,

    I just realized that this thread is in the Shakta Forum, instead of the Vedas & Brahmanas Forum. I apologize, but I find this placement interestingly odd. Not in a bad way. But, in hindsight...it would have suited the Vedas & Brahmanas forum-section better due to the content of your original post.

    Quote Originally Posted by Devi Dasi View Post
    ....snip....
    Namaste,

    Dang, DD. You went all Hindutva on us.
    Last edited by Sudas Paijavana; 16 January 2014 at 03:46 AM.

  8. #18

    Re: Roots of Shakti.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jaskaran Singh View Post
    Wikipedia disagrees (not that it's reliable, but still ):
    "The Khilani are a collection of 98 "apocryphal" hymns of the Rigveda, recorded in the Bāṣkala, but not in the Śākala shakha. They are late additions to the text of the Rigveda, but still belong to the "Mantra" period of Vedic Sanskrit."
    The same Wikipedia attests to its' late date

    Quote

    "The Śrī Sūkta forms part of the khilanis or appendices to the Ṛkveda.
    These were late additions to the Ṛkveda, found only in the Bāṣkala śākhā,
    and the hymn themselves exist in several strata that differ both in content and period of composition. For instance, according to J. Scheftelowitz, strata 1 consists of verses 1-19
    (with verses 3-12 addressed to the goddess Śri and 1-2 and 13-17 to Lakṣmī),
    while the second strata has verses 16-29
    (i.e., the second version deletes verses 16-19 of the first).
    The third strata, with verses beginning from number 23,
    similarly overlaps with the second version"



    Anyway , there is no point in swearing by wikipedia. I will come up with a neat reference in a moment

  9. #19

    Re: Roots of Shakti.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sudas Paijavana View Post
    Namaste,

    For colloquial reasons, I personally refer to this as the "Integrated ShAkala-BAshkala Edition*" - the Shri Rg-Veda we have currently.

    *For anyone that ever wondered: what in the world is Sudas talking about when he always writes this "Integrated Edition" stuff? Well, now you know.

    ps - Is the Purusha Sukta-m originally of the ShAkala/ShAkalya tradition or of BAshkala tradition? My PDF files in the Sanskrit of the two traditions are not opening right now. May someone please be kind as to confirm for me if the Purusha Sukta-m is found in both or just in one of them?
    Namaste,

    Both of them!

  10. #20
    Join Date
    November 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    80
    Rep Power
    167

    Re: Roots of Shakti.

    Quote Originally Posted by Alter ego View Post
    Yes , Vedic gods have blond hair(Indra/bhaga etc..) .Though Vedic Brahmins predominantly had black hair , there are many references of blonde Brahmins [patanjali's pingalakeshin(=blond hair),hiranyakeshin(=golden hair) of srauta sutras ] etc. However , there is no racism at all anywhere in Rigveda.

    The more race conscious Buddhist scriptures provide many glimpses. Buddhacharita(23.2) says--"Brahmins of uncorrupted caste have blue eyes and blond hair " . Many blond Brahmins are mentioned in Buddhist scriptures namely-Kapila, sariputra , maudgalayana , megha and others . Pramanavartikatika

    (A commentary on aforesaid scriptures) says absence of such features is a sign of intermixing. Buddha suggested that black haired Brahmins dye their hair colour.
    Hare Krsna,

    Ahh... no. For one thing Buddhists don't have varnasharama and brahmins, Lord Buddha shaved and Buddhist monks shave off all their head hair. They do not even keep brahmin shikha (lock of hair). what possible spiritual purpose is found in preserving hues of the temporary material body hairs? All this line of reasoning is British interpolation and racist "scholarship" which was imposed on Vedas. The citation of Buddhacharita(23.2) actually says, "their eyes opened wide with curiosity like blue lotuses."

    Here's a quick wiki:
    "Blue Lotus (Skt. utpala; Tib. ut pa la): This is a symbol of the victory of the spirit over the senses, and signifies the wisdom of knowledge. Not surprisingly, it is the preferred flower of Manjushri, the bodhisattva of wisdom."
    "Europeans Vedic interpreters used this same racial idea to explain the Vedas. The Vedas speak of a battle between light and darkness. This was turned into a war between light skinned Aryans and dark skinned Dravidians. Such so-called scholars did not bother to examine the fact that most religions and mythologies including those of the ancient American Indians, Egyptians, Greeks and Persians have the idea of such a battle between light and darkness (which is the symbolic conflict between truth and falsehood), but we do not interpret their statements racially. In short, the Europeans projected racism into the history of India, and accused the Hindus of the very racism that they themselves were using to dominate the Hindus.

    European scholars also pointed out that caste in India was originally defined by color. Brahmins were said to be white, Kshatriyas red, Vaishyas yellow, and Shudras black. Hence the Brahmins were said to have been originally the white Aryans and the Dravidians the dark Shudras. However, what these colors refer to is the gunas or qualities of each class. White is the color of purity (sattvaguna), dark that of impurity (tamoguna), red the color of action (rajoguna), and yellow the color of trade (also rajoguna). To turn this into races is simplistic and incorrect. Where is the red race and where is the yellow race in India? And when have the Kshatriyas been a red race and the Vaishyas as yellow race?

    The racial idea reached yet more ridiculous proportions. Vedic passages speaking of their enemies (mainly demons) as without nose (a-nasa), were interpreted as a racial slur against the snub-nosed Dravidians. Now Dravidians are not snub-nosed or low nosed people, as anyone can see by examining their facial features. And the Vedic demons are also described as footless (a-pada). Where is such a footless and noseless race and what does this have to do with the Dravidians? Moreover Vedic gods like Agni (fire) are described as footless and headless. Where are such headless and footless Aryans? Yet such 'scholarship' can be found in prominent Western books on the history of India, some published in India and used in schools in India to the present day.


    This idea was taken further and Hindu gods like Krishna, whose name means dark, or Shiva who is portrayed as dark, were said to have originally been Dravidian gods taken over by the invading Aryans (under the simplistic idea that Dravidians as dark-skinned people must have worshipped dark colored gods). Yet Krishna and Shiva are not black but dark blue. Where is such a dark blue race?



    Moreover the different Hindu gods, like the classes of Manu, have diffe- rent colors relative to their qualities. Lakshmi is portrayed as pink, Saras- wati as white, Kali as blue-black, or Yama, the God of death, as green. Where have such races been in India or elsewhere?

    In a similar light, some scholars pointed out that Vedic gods like Savitar have golden hair and golden skin, thus showing blond and fair-skinned people living in ancient India. However, Savitar is a sun-god and sun-god are usually gold in color, as has been the case of the ancient Egyptian, Mayan, and Inca and other sun-gods. Who has a black or blue sun-god? This is from the simple fact that the sun has a golden color. What does this have to do with race?...

    Nor is the Caucasian race the "white" race. Caucasians can be of any color from pure white to almost pure black, with every shade of brown in between. The predominent Caucasian type found in the world is not the blond-blue-eyes northern European but the black hair, brown-eyed darker skinned Mediterranean type that we find from southern Europe to north India. Similarly the Mongolian race is not yellow. Many Chinese have skin whiter than many so-called Caucasians. In fact of all the races, the Caucasian is the most variable in its skin color." http://www.hindunet.org/hindu_histor...frawley_1.html
    "Such a view is not good scholarship or archeology but merely cultural imperialism. The Western Vedic scholars did in the intellectual sphere what the British army did in the political realm - discredit, divide and conquer the Hindus...


    It is unfortunate that this approach has not been questioned more, particularly by Hindus. Even though Indian Vedic scholars like Dayananda Saraswati, Bal Gangadhar Tilak and Arobindo rejected it, most Hindus today passively accept it. They allow Western, generally Christian, scholars to interpret their history for them and quite naturally Hinduism is kept in a reduced role. Many Hindus still accept, read or even honor the translations of the 'Vedas' done by such Christian missionary scholars as Max Muller, Griffith, Monier-Williams and H. H. Wilson. Would modern Christians accept an interpretation of the Bible or Biblical history done by Hindus aimed at converting them to Hinduism? Universities in India also use the Western history books and Western Vedic translations that propound such views that denigrate their own culture and country.



    ...It is not an issue to be taken lightly, because how a culture is defined historically creates the perspective from which it is viewed in the modern social and intellectual context. Tolerance is not in allowing a false view of one's own culture and religion to be propagated without question. That is merely self-betrayal." http://www.stephen-knapp.com/solid_e...n_invasion.htm
    uttama hañā vaiṣṇava habe nirabhimāna
    jīve sammāna dibe jāni' 'kṛṣṇa'-adhiṣṭhāna

    "Although a Vaiṣṇava is a most exalted person, he is prideless and gives
    all respect to everyone, knowing everyone to be the resting place of Kṛṣṇa."
    -Śrī Caitanya Caritāmṛta Antya 20.25

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Dangerous Mantra Meditation?
    By Kismet in forum Yoga
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 15 March 2013, 10:44 PM
  2. Role of female goddesses, energies?
    By Cosinuskurve in forum God in Hindu Dharma
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 12 April 2012, 11:05 AM
  3. The placement of Shakti in daily life?
    By WTyler in forum Shakta
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 22 March 2011, 07:36 AM
  4. Replies: 70
    Last Post: 28 June 2010, 07:15 AM
  5. Shakti
    By satay in forum Shakta
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 16 May 2007, 11:13 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •