Murtis with hair?

[Divine Kala]

I don't know how common this, and I'm shocked that I only noticed this today, but is it common for idols of Goddesses to have actual hair? The idol of Parvati that is installed near the linga at my temple has hair and I only noticed it today (I believe her hair is usually kept back but she was dressed differently today).

How common is it? Is it maybe a North Indian thing? The temple follows the Northern style (with the linga being freely accessible to all, etc) so maybe it's more common there?

[sm78]

I don't know about north, but it is extremely common in North East, Bengal etc. It is just a local practice. However, I am not a big fan of the practice, as the temple ritual of abhishaka cannot be performed on such idols. Abhisheka is thus rare in NE and North indian temples unless it a shiva linga.

[Ramakrishna]

I saw a picture online once of a Kali Maa murti with hair on it. That's the only one I've ever seen. As sm78 said, it would rule out abhishekam.

Jai Sri Ram

[Divine Kala]

It most certainly does. The Parvati murti has a sign before it requesting that devotees not pour milk or water over her. I don't think the main idol in the temple, a Durga murti, has hair but who knows? She might as she's dressed most of the time and I might not have noticed.

[sm78]

Temple worship is dictated by Agama (shaiva and vaishnava). Most of the elements of shakti worship, the details of the deities etc are however from Tantras. Tantras don't contain any information on sthapatya, various procedures of establishing and consecrating idols etc. Tantra was solely concerned with Individual worship (there are shaiva and vaishnava tantras as well, embedded in their respective agamic literature - while shakta only have the tantric section in their literature). The dhyana slokas in tantras are meant for visualization only and not carving out idols for temples. This has lead to all this confusion regarding worship of shakti. The true tantric peetha sthanas don't worship idols, but some sort shila or a stone representing shakti.

In south india, people completely resort to Agamas even while setting up shakta temples and idols. This is fine, as shakta literature don't deal with this topic and shaiva or vaishnava agamas have to be relied upon. In North and NE, there is very little knowledge of Agama shastra and sthapatya vidya, and people do whatever is the local custom, thus curving out idols similar to dhyana slokas in Tantras - which then cannot be worshipped by standard means of agamic worship and certain essential features of temple worship like abhisheka etc have to be dropped.

When one is building temples and consecrating idols, I believe following the Agamic shastra is better if not necessary, and hence I prefer south indian temples. Only cost is one can only connect to the deities through sight (darshan) and not touch.

[Sahasranama]

SM, do you know where to obtain stones to use in panchayatan worship for Ganesha (Sonabhadra) and Ambika (Svarna Mukhi)?

[Eastern Mind]

Vannakkam:

I think this is an excellent example of regional variations being bigger than some people would acknowledge. SM, thanks so much for the explanation. But the difference also highlights the importance of 'unity in diversity'. It takes a rare being to fully comprehend 'that's nice' and stand together with someone who worships so differently without having an emotional reaction. Mind gets so indoctrinated by what we become accustomed to. Of course it can go too far. An example for me personally is animal sacrifice. I just don't think I could stand there and watch alongside my Hindu brethen in that case. But something like this, to me, is a small thing.

Aum Namasivaya