New Deities

[Aupmanyav]

Cattle breeds of India (I have not checked their genetics, I do not know which one might have been brought by Aryans. There is quite a variety. However, I do know that Kashmiri Gujars graze their cows and buffaloes in Uttarkhand. Pastoralists go wherever the grass is available for their live-stock. During famines, Rajasthani, Gujarati, Maharashtrian pastoralists take their live-stock to other places) :

Shree Math has procured 24 rare Indian breed: Amrithmahal, Baragur,Dangi, Deoni, Gaoloa, Gir, Hallikaru, Hariana, Jawari, Kangayam, Kankrej, Kasaragod,Khilari, Krishna, Malavi, Malenadu Gidda, Nagori, Nimari, Ongole, Rati, Sahiwal, Sindhi, Tharparker, Umblachery, Vechur and rears them in eco friendly goshalas.
http://www.vishwagou.org/indiancowbreed.htm

 

[Kirran]

HLK, there are indeed cattle indigenous to India. Some breeds are mixed with foreign breeds, some are practically pure zebu cattle.

But the domestic horse is from Central/West Asia. That includes Japanese horses, Zambian horses and horses from Uttarakhand through Tamil Nadu.

 

[Aupmanyav]

My guess is that the Aryan cattle, if they were brought in, would have mixed with the North Indian Breeds - Sahiwal, Rathi, Nagori, Tharparkar, etc. (Punjab, Haryana and Rajasthan), since Aryans stayed in these regions (Sapta-saindhava, Hapta-Hendu) for a long time before migrating to East or South of India after climatic and/or tectonic changes around 1,900 BC. That is why many of the brahmins are known as Saraswatas. The horns of North Indian and South Indian (or even Maharashtrian) cattle are very different. (See Baragur and Sahiwal)

Once a mighty river, Saraswati (Ghagghar-Hakra, Sarsuti)

 

[Stormcry]

But the domestic horse is from Central/West Asia

Rig Vedic horse is certainly not from Central Asia. The Rig Vedic horse is born of the ocean,which indicates southern connections. The Yajur Veda ends with an invocation of the Divine horse that has the ocean as its belly (samudra udaram, TS VII.5.25). The Brihadarayaka Upanishad identifies the day and night as the two greatnesses of the horse rooted in the eastern and western oceans (BU I.1.2).

There are many equus bones found in ancient India, particularly the onager (Equus hemionus), which is native to Kachchh in Gujarat. Rig Vedic horse could have been Onager, which explains its oceanic connections as its native region of Kachchh is along the sea.

 

[Kirran]

Yes, it is a symbolic horse. But for them to talk about it, but there must have been real horses for there to be symbolic horses to talk about.

We have no genetic or archaeological evidence to support multiple domestication events for the domestic horse.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Day and Night, The Ocean, The Aryan Concept of the world. Hail Indra, The Mighty Warrior, Wielder of Vajra, Imbiber of Soma.

The Hindu Vajra (after all, it was made of Dadhyancha's bones) and the Buddhist Vajra.

 

[Servant_of_the_One1]

Should Hindus declare gandhi to be also god?

 

[Aupmanyav]

Should Hindus declare gandhi to be also god?

He is already a sage, Mahatma (Great Soul). We have enough Gods and Goddesses.

 

[Kirran]

Should Hindus declare gandhi to be also god?

Can if they want. Some can worship him, maybe over time he will be thought of as a deva.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Kirran, I think that will be blasphemy. No avatara is to come before 427,000 years. No more Gods. However, there is no problem about worshiping sages.

 

[Kirran]

Yeah, fair enough. I stand corrected. But some non-Hindus might see him as having been deified in such a situation. Anyway, beliefs do drift, and different figures become foci for worship. Perhaps Murugan was once a revered sage.

 

[kalyan]

LOL, the aryan theory is a complete myth

 

[Kirran]

LOL, the aryan theory is a complete myth

Many make this assertion about evolution, and some do so about the round Earth theory. Each to their own.

 

[Goblin]

Can always count on you for a good intellectual reply, Aup!



Good example!

Deifying the guru is an easy one



Fair enough. I'm not necessarily of the opinion that it WILL happen. But of the opinion there's no reason why it couldn't.



And perhaps one day there'll be Hindus who venerate Jesus as the Supreme. The Christas, or some such



Do you mean the religions Hinduism mixes with should be living? I'd say that many European pagan religions are now living, to be honest.

funny new religious trend, the majority of Pagans ive met in america study Hindu upanishads & other texts
neo paganism has gotten a major leg up from Hiduism which is very similar to todays "neo"paganism(s)
many wiccans study shiva-shakti philosophy and advaita.

Paganism has become "Hinduism for westerners" who feel that practicing hinduism involves cultural appropriation, and find they prefer a more European thing.

so alot of pagans use pagan deities and magick circles in place of hindu deities and puja, while at its heart practicing Hindu teachings

 

[Kirran]

funny new religious trend, the majority of Pagans ive met in america study Hindu upanishads & other texts
neo paganism has gotten a major leg up from Hiduism which is very similar to todays "neo"paganism(s)
many wiccans study shiva-shakti philosophy and advaita.

Paganism has become "Hinduism for westerners" who feel that practicing hinduism involves cultural appropriation, and find they prefer a more European thing.

That really is fascinating, and is a development I welcome. Thanks for bringing this up.

I wonder if you know where one might read more about this?

 

[Goblin]

hmm... i suppose you could look it up. its a well known phenomenon that neopagans tend to practice eastern religions for a time before going back to paganism with increased enthusiasm.

im pretty entrenched in the pagan community in ohio and indiana. so like clockwork it tends to happen with pagans 18-25, they become Hindus, get fanatical about it, then become disillusioned with the Indian community, quit going to temple then come back to paganism. less often they turn to tibetan teachings

if you read wicca&witchcraft for dummies they have a section in the book talking about hindu, buddhist, and shinto influence. but from personal observation, Hinduism often appeals most to the idol-lovers and dirt-worshipers people call "Pagans"

 

[Aupmanyav]

Perhaps Murugan was once a revered sage.

He is described as a god of eternal youth: "His face shines a myriad rays light and removes the darkness from this world".

Kartikeya (Sanskrit Kārtikēya "son of Kṛttikās" Tamil: Kārttikēyaṉ) also known as Skanda, Kumaran,Kumara Swami and Subramaniyan is the Hindu god of war. He is the Commander-in-Chief of the army of the devas and the son of Shiva and Parvati.

Murugan (Tamil Murukaṉ) is often referred to as Tamiḻ kaṭavuḷ ("god of the Tamils") and is worshiped primarily in areas with Tamil influences, especially South India, Sri Lanka, Mauritius, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore and Réunion. His six most important shrines in India are the Six Abodes of Murugan, temples located in Tamil Nadu.

In Bengal and Odisha (Aup adds: and the rest of India), he is popularly known as Kartikeya.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kartikeya

 

[Aupmanyav]

neo paganism has gotten a major leg up from Hiduism which is very similar to todays "neo"paganism(s)

Paganism has become "Hinduism for westerners" who feel that practicing hinduism involves cultural appropriation, and find they prefer a more European thing. so alot of pagans use pagan deities and magick circles in place of hindu deities and puja, while at its heart practicing Hindu teachings

Hinduism is ancient and is also the latest, because it keeps on revalidating itself. It is a living dynamic tradition.

Whatever suits people, no problem. One can be fully Western and Hindu also. I am proud to be a Hindu and a pagan.

 

[shivsomashekhar]

Of course. I have no problems with Shaiva believing that the Brahman is Shiva and a Shakta believing that Brahman is Durga.

What I meant to say was that ancient Vedantins have even clarified those phrases about Brahman as referring to Vishnu and even Krishna. And yes, that includes Shankara.

If you are implying that Shankara endorsed a hierarchy of Gods (as the Vaishnavas do), then that is incorrect. Nowhere, in his literature does he support the notion of a hierarchy of Gods nor do other scholars in his line.

The idea of Vishnu supremacy is specific to Vaishnava doctrines and is not a part of Advaita. I am seeing some attempts to project Shankara as a Vaishnava (the reasons behind these attempts remain unknown) and it should be clear to everyone that such claims are incorrect.

 

[kalyan]

If you are implying that Shankara endorsed a hierarchy of Gods (as the Vaishnavas do), then that is incorrect. Nowhere, in his literature does he support the notion of a hierarchy of Gods nor do other scholars in his line.

The idea of Vishnu supremacy is specific to Vaishnava doctrines and is not a part of Advaita. I am seeing some attempts to project Shankara as a Vaishnava (the reasons behind these attempts remain unknown) and it should be clear to everyone that such claims are incorrect.

do you have any proof that you have taken from the authentic commentaries of Adi Shankara to support your argument, not the recent stuff like the laharis which were attributed to real Adi Shankara?

Refer to Adi Shankara only authentic commentaries STILL available on BG, Vishnu Sahasra Namam, and Brahma Sutra Bhasyams/Upanishad Bhasyam.....He says 'Vishnu as the unparalleled deity' and he says Vishnu is the only Supreme Brahman claimed by the Vedas as there can only be one Supreme, Rudra/Durga/Any devathas are mini devathas, they act under the control of 1 supreme Maha Vishnu. Where Adi Shankara has to mention Supreme Brahman with a name he uses word 'Vishnu' 'vAsudeva', nArayaNa and temporary power that mini devathas get is due to Vishnu acting as their inner antaryami...Jivas are anuvu(atomic) both by their swaroopa and swabhava(form and nature), Paramaatma is called 'Vibhuvu' the one who is spread everywhere in everything and who acts as inner controller for the Jivas and who is the atma of the Jivas and is Vishnu(vishnu can be referred as tattvam too not, he/she/it)....The realised ones when they got rid of all the karmic bondage go to a place called 'Paramapadam' which belongs to nithya Vibhuti which is 3 times larger than the leela Vibhuti....There is a lot of pathways that a Jiva encounters, am not gonna mention all that..But when he reaches before Maha Vishnu, Maha Vishnu who is seated wth Sri, Neela, Bhu devi asks the Jiva 'Kosi'? then the Jiva replies 'Aham Brahmasmi' he says this because he truly realised the atma of him is paramaatma so he refer paramaatma with him just as we attribute physical body with us.