Roots of Shakti.

[Jaskaran Singh]

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

23 verses? Are you sure they're not adding in the phala shruti when they're dating it?
BTW, the text Devi: the great goddess : female divinity in South Asian art states that the shrI sUktam is pre-bauddha:

[Alter ego]

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."

I see that you and I are partly right. A part of it is from Brahmana period and another from very late classical(unaccented) period. However it is definitely not from mantra period.

Here I quote Witzel

"The hymns are of various age, and many have various additions, e.g., the Śrīsūkta has Brahmana time and even later, unaccented additions. The Śrīsūkta was and is so popular that it is even used by Nepalese Buddhists; cf. also Author, WZKS 23, 1979, 5-28, WZKS 24,1980, 21-82.

http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~witzel/canon.pdf

[Alter ego]

23 verses? Are you sure they're not adding in the phala stuti when they're dating it?
BTW, the text Devi: the great goddess : female divinity in South Asian art states that the shrI sUktam is pre-bauddha:

That it is pre bauddha , I don't dispute . but again Buddha is dated to 400 BCE according to modern scholars , a century or more later than panini

[devotee]

Your translation seems to be slightly interpolated and/or has an advaitin-slant, vAgAmbhR^iNI R^iShiH never says that she "preaches" to indra, the other gods, and the men, it says that she makes a person into a brAhmaNa, R^iShi, or intelligent individual (yaM kAmaye taM tamugraM kR^iNomi tam brahmANaM tamR^iShiM taM sumedhAm) THROUGH sharing the knowledge, in and of herself, which is pleasing to the deva-s, to humans, and others (ahameva svayamidaM vadAmi juShTam devebhiruta mAnuShebhiH). It never states that the deva-s themselves did not know the knowledge or that she preached to them; she is just conveying that knowledge which loved by the deva-s, hence the term "juShTam."
Here is a recitation of the devI sUktam if you're interested: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCinQRLPiBQ

This is not my translation. I have given in summary of Hindi translation done by Sri Ram Sharma Acharya, a renowned scholar of the Vedas. It is true that there may be differences in word-to-word translation as I have not reproduced word-to--word translation but a gist of it. Sri Ram Sharma Acharya cannot be considered having a Advaitic bias as you have felt as he started Gayatri-movement (which has lakhs of followers on date ... I am not one of them) and it is not purely Advaitic in nature.

OM

[Alter ego]

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."

Pranam ,

Regarding the buddhist caste system , we already had a lot of discussion.

Please see

http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=10760

[Devi Dasi]

Pranam ,

Regarding the buddhist caste system , we already had a lot of discussion.

Please see

http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=10760

Hare Krsna,

Caste and varna are not the same thing. Neither are they race-based classifications. Buddhists don't have varnasrama because Buddhists don't follow the Vedas.

[Alter ego]

Hare Krsna,

Caste and varna are not the same thing. Neither are they race-based classifications.
Buddhists don't have varnasrama because Buddhists don't follow the Vedas.

I agree that varna and caste are not same .I also agree that they have nothing to do with race. However , Buddhists do have varnasharama because it is reflected in the Dharmapada. In the aforementioned link , I have provided many quotes which throw light upon the prevalence of varnashrama in Buddhism. Caste system is strikingly present in all Buddhist texts, with the exception of none. I couldn't find a single chapter without reference to caste Modern Buddhists deny they ever had caste system.So do modern sikhs.But we do know that in the bhatt bani bhai lehna praised guru arjan of "sodhi" clan. All gurus were khatris and akalis mostly "jat". In gyan prabodh , yagnas and caste system are recommended and in dasam granth kalki avtar it is said that kalki restores caste system.Even today , we see akali , ramgarhi and ravidasi gurudwaras. The Dasam patshah called himself "kshtatriya" and also said "mai naa jaano vipran ki reet" . Buddha also said something on similar lines. .

Infact ,caste in Sikhism is very mild whereas in Buddhism it is very prominent. There were Brahmin court poets in Buddhist Thailand until recently

About Sri/Lakshmi,she is mentioned in Brahmanas

Which brahmana? Where? Can you please provide the reference

Btw,does anyone know about Sri Aditi's relation with fertility Goddess Lajja Gauri?..

In the Brahmanaspati verse you posted on the other thread, the notion of creator may have been in reference to aditi . It is said that creativity commenced in uttanapad(squatting) position .It follows by saying " Aditi was born from daksha, and daksha from Aditi"

[Sudas Paijavana]

I agree that varna and caste are not same .I also agree that they have nothing to do with race. However , Buddhists do have varnasharama because it is reflected in the Dharmapada. In the aforementioned link , I have provided many quotes which throw light upon the prevalence of varnashrama in Buddhism. Caste system is strikingly present in all Buddhist texts, with the exception of none. I couldn't find a single chapter without reference to caste Modern Buddhists deny they ever had caste system.So do modern sikhs.But we do know that in the bhatt bani bhai lehna praised guru arjan of "sodhi" clan. All gurus were khatris and akalis mostly "jat". In gyan prabodh , yagnas and caste system are recommended and in dasam granth kalki avtar it is said that kalki restores caste system.Even today , we see akali , ramgarhi and ravidasi gurudwaras. The Dasam patshah called himself "kshtatriya" and also said "mai naa jaano vipran ki reet" . Buddha also said something on similar lines. .

Infact ,caste in Sikhism is very mild whereas in Buddhism it is very prominent. There were Brahmin court poets in Buddhist Thailand until recently

Namaste,

Wasn't Nāgasena repeatedly addressed as a Brahmin even after he converted to Buddhism? I thought converts to Dhamma forfeit their titles. I'm confused now.

[Alter ego]

Namaste,

Wasn't Nāgasena repeatedly addressed as a Brahmin even after he converted to Buddhism? I thought converts to Dhamma forfeit their titles. I'm confused now.

Indeed , and not just Nagasena

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhis...ahmin_families

Forfeiting titles after conversion , proclaiming all are one , dining together and not mentioning caste even as a passing reference -these all sound very idealistic

But alas, neo Buddhists live in a fancy world

Barring Buddha's barber with whom he had good personal equations , no non brahman-kshatriya was ever mentioned as a disciple of Buddha.

Infact , only upper caste people were allowed to have discourse with Buddha.

This theme is recurrent through out the pali canon but for a reference one can see Ambatta sutta



"Now at that time a number of the brethren were walking up and down in the open air. And Ambattha went up to them, and said: 'Where may the venerable Gotama be lodging now? We have come hither to call upon him.'
8. Then the bhikkus thought: 'This young Brahman Ambattha is of distinguished family. and a pupil of the distinguished Brahman Pokkharasâdi. The Blessed One will not find it difficult to hold conversation with such.' And they said to Ambattha: 'There, Ambattha, is his lodging{2}, where the door is shut, go quietly up and enter the porch gently, and give a cough, and knock on the cross-bar. The Blessed One will open the door for you.'"

http://www.buddhistlibraryonline.net...8-Ambatta.html

[Devi Dasi]

I agree that varna and caste are not same .I also agree that they have nothing to do with race. However , Buddhists do have varnasharama because it is reflected in the Dharmapada.

Hare Krsna,

Whatever system the Buddhists have it is NOT Vedic Varnasrama, because they don't follow the Vedas. Whether or not culturally they kept some remnant of a social caste-jati system is not the same as varnasrama. While some early brahmin converts to Buddhism may have kept their varna identification, this is not any formal part of Buddhist religion because Varnasrama is part of Vedic Sanskruti and Buddhism formally rejected it.

And the point is, about the blond hair and blue eyes, which is just a variant of British Aryan invasion theory.... nonsense.

As for Sikh's, they are Hindu's with a British corrupted rejection of their roots, nothing more and nothing less. Of course they have caste surnames. What does it have to do with Lord Buddha promoting Brahmins with dyed blonde hair to maintain an appearance of a racial remnant, as per Aryan being a WHITE caucasian race interpolated by British scholars?

There are no Buddhist brahmins because brahmins uphold the primacy of the Vedas. For what purpose a "brahmin" who doesn't even believe in Vedas?

In the aforementioned link , I have provided many quotes which throw light upon the prevalence of varnashrama in Buddhism. Caste system is strikingly present in all Buddhist texts, with the exception of none.

Caste-jati is not the same thing as varnasrama and only indicates a population has Hindu origin, which we know Lord Buddha did as do Sikhs. Varnasrama has to do with maintaining Vedic Dharma, quite an impossibility when you dispense with Vedas.

I would like to know the Kshatriya varna of Buddhists, please. Where are they located?