Vedic Rituals: Punyaha-vācanam (Declaring the Sacred Day).
The Form of Agni
The Face of Agni Agni Mukham
Fire Offering: Agni Kārya Homa
Sacrifice of Fulfillment : Jayādi Homa
Viśvasya Ayatanam
Temples and Poetry
Agama in Theory and Practice
Relevance of Agamic Studies in Modern Times.
Linga Worship
Linga in Vishnu Anugraha Murti
Virinci Nārāyaṇa Sankarātman
Śiva Kaivalya in Cambodia
Śiva Bhāgavatas and Vishnu Bhāgavatas
Sandhya-vandanam and Naṭarājā
Bhujanga-Trasita Nṛittam
Śiva as the Destroyer of Blind Demon “Andhakāśuravadha”
A Rare Kalabhairava
Khandariya Mahādēva Temple at Khajuraho: A Temple of the Bhairava Saiva School
Sakti Worship in Tamilnadu
Vedic Origin of Goddesses: Some Aspects
Murugan
Shanmukha
The Puzzle of Varaha
Varaha at Mamallapuram
The Origin of Rama Cult: Myth and Reality
Sri Rāmāyana in Tamilnadu In Art, Thought and Literature
Balarāma in Tamilnadu
Kṛṣṇa Sadhana
Kṛṣṇa Yoga is Kṛṣhna Sadhanā
Worship of Indra in Ancient Tamilnadu
Vedic Traditions in the Maṇimekalai
Bibliography
About the Book
This book explores the Hindu iconography from the Vedic to recent period in time and space that would dispel many misconceptions. The first few articles deal with Agni, the fire of Vedas. The fire has two inherent powers, the consuming heat energy and illuminating-beneficial energy, which they called on one hand as Rudra and on the other Viṣṇu. Similarly Rudra is like the father and the benevolent energy of the same fire, insuperable, is called mother devi Pārvati, the male and the female, in one and the same form as Ardhanāri. Most of the important iconographic visualizations arise from such syncretic forms that are dealt with in this volume. For example the concept of Liṅga or Varāha, gives so many layers that are properly focused that would come as revelations. At another level some individual manifestations like Andhakāsuravadha or Naṭarāja are rooted in Vedic understanding of darkness and light.
The writings of some that there was no worship of feminine power in the Vedic age are shown as pedestrian, worthy of outright rejection. Similarly some hold that the Muruga Kartikeya is exclusive and the earliest god of the Tamil is disproved and shown here as a Sanskrit word "Mrgya" in Prakrit form. The origin of Rama and Krishna and their place in the chronological perspective is given in detail with epigraphical evidence and disproved some of the abysmal ignorance of some professorial claimants.
Each article with references and notes is thought provoking, original and linked to the factual utterances which are absolutely necessary for those who seek proper approach to the subject.
Foreword-Nature of the Vedic Religion
His Holiness Sri Chandrasekharendra Sarasvati Swamikal,
The Senior Sankaracharya Mahaswamikal,Kanchi Kamakoti Peetham
We should all strive to cultivate lofty and noble sentiments, and, eschewing all bad and selfish thoughts, live in a spirit of devotion to God and love for fellowmen. Human stature increases in proportion to the nobility of human thought and deed. The spirit of selfless service, the readiness to sacrifice, devotion to God, and love for and goodwill towards all, and hatred for none, are the outcome of a highly developed mind, and go by the name of culture. Culture known as kalā in Sanskrit, and arts like music, painting, etc., are regarded as the outward expression of this high culture.It is interesting to note the verbal affinity that exists between the words kalā, culture, kal (the Tamil word for learn), kalāsālā, and college. A man of culture is kin with the whole world. He is the friend of all and enemy of none. For him the three worlds are his home land (svadeśo bhuvanatrayam). The culture of a people is judged by a soundness of the heart of the people taken as a whole, though there may be individuals with defects and deficiencies.
The touchstone of the culture of a nation is the inspired sayings of its immortal poets (mahā kavi), whose poems have stood the test of time. These immortal poems flow from the fullness of their heart and are the expressions of the noble culture which they represent and in which they are steeped. These great poets have no private axe to grind. Having no pet theories or sectarian siddhantās to bolster up, they have no need to import specious arguments in their poetry. They give expression to truth; their insight into truth gives them the courage of utterance. Their authority is accepted to prove the culture of the people in whose midst they flowered. Homer and Shakespeare are two among such great poets in the West, and in our country Kālidāsa and Bāṇa are poets without a peer. It is said that the ring finger came to be called anamikā in Sanskrit, because a person who wanted to take a count of great poets, counted first Kālidāsa on his little finger, but could not think of any fit person to count on the next (ring) finger. So that finger came to be known as nameless or anāmika. As regards the greatness of Bāṇa, there is a saying that other poets used the crumbs that were left over in Bāṇa's plate (bānocchiṣṭam jagat sarvam). Thus, these poets have come to be regarded as great masters. Their verdict is accepted as authority, not only in matters pertaining to culture, but in religious matters also.
In the context of our daily life, we are frequently called upon to determine the nature of our duties, or dharma. The question arises, what is our dharma and from what authority is it derived? Ordinarily, the enactments of the legislature, i.e., the laws of the State, regulate our public conduct. These laws derive their sanction from the constitution adopted by the representatives of the people. The laws are also enacted by the elected representatives of the people. It does not require much argument to show that the voters are of various grades of intellectual and moral calibre, and that not all the representatives they elect are the best that could be found. Such a state of affairs is inevitable in this imperfect world. Some of the laws may not also be perfect from the moral point or view. That is why occasionally we hear judges remarking that they decided a point according to law, though they are not convinced of its moral correctness.
In our day-to-day personal and moral conduct, signified by the expression dharma, our religion has declared that we should be guided by the ordinance of the Vedas. It is declared that Veda is the source of all dharma (vedo khila dharma mūlam). To illustrate the vastness of Veda, there is a story that what Sage Bharadvāja was able to learn was compared to a handful of dust taken from a mountain, the mountain representing the Vedas. If a doubt arises, which cannot be solved with references of the Vedas, we are enjoined to seek guidance from the Smṛtis. It is a mistake to regard the authors of the Smṛtis, like Manu, Yājñavalkya and Parāsara, as law-givers. Smṛtis are merely aide memoire or short notes, meant to indicate what are contained in the Vedas. The authors of the Smṛtis did not write anything new, apart from what is contained in the Śruti or the Vedas. There is the authority of Kālidāsa to this proposition. Describing the manner in which Sutīkṣna followed, for a short distance, her husband, King Dilīpa, when he took Nandini out to graze every morning, Kālidāsa states that she followed the footsteps of Nandini, like Smṛti following the meaning (footsteps) of Śruti. (śruterivarttham smritiranvagacchat). Kālidāsa has unambigously established that the Smṛtis derive their authority from the Vedas, and, in the same way as Sutīkṣna following Nandini only for a short distance, the Smṛtis only briefly indicate what the Śruti contains.
If we are unable to get the necessary guidance to clear our doubt either from the Śruti or from the Smṛtis, we are asked to be guided by the conduct of those who know and follow the Smṛtis. When this guidance is not available, we are asked to model our conduct on the action of good people who have conquered desires and ego, and are pure in heart. When even this source of guidance fails, we have to abide by the dictates of our conscience. That is how Duṣyanta reconciles himself to the love which sprang up in his breast at the sight of Sakuntala in Sage Kanva's āśrama. Being aware that it was wrong for a kṣatriya to fall in love with the daughter of a sage, he concludes that having entertained no evil thought before, his conscience could not have misled him into falling in love with a wrong person. pramāṇam antaḥkaraṇa-pravṛttayaḥ, says Kālidāsa. It is to be noted that Sri Vedanta Désika in his Rahasyatrayasāram has quoted this kavi-vākya, this authority of Kālidāsa, in support of a proposition enunciated by him, Kumarila Bhaṭṭa has also cited Kālidāsa's authority in his work.
In these days it is a fashion to give preference to conscience and to relegate all other Śāstric guidances to a secondary place, or, as is often done, to condemn them as antiquated, meaningless and irrational. But according to our Śāstras, the appeal to conscience must come as the last resort, when all the other guidances like Śruti, Smṛiti, etc., are not available. The modern view is at variance with the classical view of the authorities on dharma. The ancient view has stood the test of time and makes for enduring and eternal sanction in respect of ethical conduct. This view has been voiced in the utterances of Mahākavis like Kālidāsa, whose voice is the Truth, which is the glory and the prerogative of great poets.
Foreign critics of our Vedic religion fling at us the cheap gibe, “What a host of gods and goddesses you worship!” This charge of polytheism levelled against our religion is entirely wrong and is born out of ignorance of the fundamental teachings of the Vedas. This is what Bāṇa says on this subject:
In this verse Bāṇa says that the One God appears in the three forms of Brahma, Viṣṇu and Śiva, for a three-fold purpose, namely, creation, protection and dissolution, which functions are determined respectively by the qualities or guṇas of rajas, sattva and tamas. That One is the unborn (aja) and is the cause of these triple process. He is trayīmaya compound of the three aforesaid qualities. He is trayīmaya also in the sense that He is claimed by the trayī or the Vedas. Kālidāsa expressed more or less the same idea when he
One mūrti (manifestation in form) appears as three, and there is no question of any One of the Three being superior or inferior to the other Two, says Kālidāsa. If Brahmā, Viṣṇu, and Śiva are One in essence, then, by the same token, all the gods of the Hindu pantheon are also One in the ultimate analysis. Then why this wrangling that one god is superior to the rest? Some assert that the deity they worship is alone the highest. To a man standing under the arch at one end of a bridge, all the other arches will appear smaller than the one under which he is standing. But we are aware that all the arches of a bridge are of the same span. Similarly, to the votary of a particular deity, all the other deities will appear inferior on account of his attachment to the deity of his choice. But the truth is that all deities are manifestations, in particular ways, of one God.
God is the final of all the things of the world. If we take the example of a tree, we will find that it is the soil and water that help the seed to grow into a mighty tree. The source from which the tree came into existence from a seed, is the soil and water. The tree is sustained during its existence by the same soil and water. When the tree dies, it resolves itself into the soil and water from which it sprang. The essence or truth of the three is the soil. It is the same for all the material things like trees which constitute the world. This principle of an identical source is applicable in the case of the other forms of creation, including animals endowed with intelligence. As there is a “universal soil” at the back of “individual” soil from which a tree springs, by which it lives and into which it disappears, so too there must be a Superior Intelligence (pēraṟivu) of which our intelligences are but minute fractions. That Superior Intelligence or chit is God. He is ānanda or bliss. He is the one existent or sat. He is responsible for creation in conjunction with rajo guṇa, for preservation motivated by satva guṇa and for destruction under the impact of tamo guṇa. Thus God is triguṇātma. One appearing as Three, ekaiva mūrtiḥ bibhide tridhāśā.
Parabrahman, which is without attributes (nirguṇa) which is pure or suddha sattva becomes the personal God or īśvara. īśvara has to perform these three functions of creation, protection, and dissolution. But the suddha sattva īśvara is static. He has to become dynamic to perform the act of creation. rajo guṇa supplies the energy to act, and so, in conjunction with it, the one primal God becomes Brahma, the Creator. What is created must be maintained and made to grow and flourish. That is accomplished by īśvara assuming sattva guṇa. In that aspect, He is Viṣṇu, whose consort is Laksmi, the embodiment and bestower of prosperity. To bring about death, or the end of things created association with tamo guṇa becomes necessary. That aspect of īśvara is Śiva. It is to be remembered that the samhāra kārya (dissolution) associated with Śiva does not signify cruelty on His part. It only betokens His mercy for the created, by which He gives rest to the ignorant souls, who have a balance of unrequited karma, for the duration of the pralaya, before they are pushed into the next cycle of birth to work out their residual karmās. These three attributes, rajo guṇa, sattva guṇa and tamo guṇa, do not really belong to īśvara. He is suddha sattva svarūpa. He gets mixed with each of the three guaṇs for definite purposes, and appears in different forms as a result. Only His appearances are different; not His essence
This characterisation of Brahma, Viṣṇu and Śiva as denoting rajo guṇa, sattva guṇa and tamo guṇa respectively, is not absolute either. Viṣṇu, who is considered as symbolishing sattva guṇa, has, on occasions, taken upon Himself tamo guṇa, standing for destruction, as in His avatar as Narasimha. In the Rāma avatāra, when He fought Khara, Dūṣana, Kumbhakarṇa and Rāvaṇa, and also when he threatened to dry up the ocean, He assumed tamo guṇa. Vālmiki very appropriately describes, this aspect when he says that Rāma took upon himself intense anger, kopamāhāyan tīvram. Anger is the effect of tamo guṇa. Per contra, Śiva, whose nature is said to be tamo guṇa, being the manifestation responsible for destruction, likewise assumes sattva guṇa in His aspect as Naṭarāja and as Dakshiṇāmūrti
Thus these forms of God are not distinct, and different. They are three manifestations of the same divinity assuming different aspects for different purposes, and according to the predilections and tastes of the worshippers. It is wrong to speak of gradations of excellences among them or to say that they are diverse and different. The forms may appear different, the names may be different, but the Truth is one. It is the One that becomes three, and then thirty-three, and then thirty-three crores, according to the numberless varieties of functions of divinity. This is the basic fact declared by the Mahākavis and their words must determine us in our devotion and religious practices
I could not think of a better introduction to this work than the sayings of the Paramahamsa Parivrājakāchārya. Mahaswamikal, the Senior Saṅkarāchārya Swamikal of Kāñchi Kāmakoṭi Pītha who lived amongst us for nearly one hundred years as an embodiment of India's Life. They open up our vision of our approach to Indian godhood. His sayings on the nature of Vedic religion sums up the True spirit of Hindu thought and I begin the work with his saying which will enlighten the reader on the synthetic nature of Indian thoughts.
Maharishi Aurobindo wrote that “In India, the high Vedic beginning, the Great spiritual stir of the Upanishads, the wide flood of, Buddhism, Vedanta, Sānkhya, the Puraṇic, and Tāntiric religions, the flowering of Śaivism and Vaiṣṇavism, in the Southern kingdoms have come in on a surge, of spiritual light and a massive or intense climbing of the religious or the religio-philosophic mind to its own heights, its noblest realties, its largest riches of version and experience. It was in such periods of intellect, thought, poetry, the arts and the material life flowered into splendour, in the Foundations of Indian Culture”. The Aurobindo Ashram, Pondichery, (1921 and reprinted in 1988 pp. 80-91).
The Great Maharishi of Indian Art History, Ananda Coomaraswamy, in his introduction to “Study of the Vedas” wrote that “The Sacred literature of India is available to most of us only in translation made by Scholars, trained in liturgical rather than in Metaphysics, and it has been expounded and explained or as I should say “explained away” mainly by scholars rarely trained with the assumption of naturalist, and the Anthropologist, scholars whose intellectual capacities, have been too much inhibited by their own powers of observations that they can no longer distinguish the reality with appearance, the supermal sun of metaphysics from the physical sun of their own experience.” (Ananda Coomaraswamy in ‘Perceptions of the Vedas’ ed by Vidya Nivas Misra, IGNCA and Manohar, New Delhi, 2000, Introduction)
Dr. Stella Kramrisch, the greatest exponent of the Hindu temple in her introduction to the ‘Hindu temple’ says “The attempt is made here to set up the Hindu temple conceptually, from the foundation to the final. Its structure is rooted in Vedic tradion, and primeval modes of buildings have contributed their shapes. The principles are given in the sacred texts of India and the structural rules in the treatises on architecture. They are carried out in the shrines which still stand through out the country, and which were built in many varieties and styles, over a millennium and a half from the fifth cent. AD
The purpose of the Hindu temple is shown by its form. It is the concrete symbol of reintegration and coheres with the rhythm of the thought imaged in its carvings and laid out in its proportion. Their perfection is a celebration of all the rites enacted during the building of the temple from the ground to its pinnacle. Nothing that is seen on the temple is left unsaid in the verbal tradition nor is any of the detail arbitrary or superfluous. Each has definite place and is part of the whole.” (Stella Kramrisch, "Exploring India's Sacred Art", edited by Barbara Stoler Miller, IGNCA, New Delhi 1994, p. 20)
This book may be said to be the result of inspiration I derived from the sagacious statements of the Rishis, the bright luminaries in the horizon of Indian cultural ethos, to look for the magic of the original sound of the Vedas, aided by the secondary help of translations, to penetrate into the secrets of Indian art and architecture. Soon I began to realize I learnt more from the Sound of the Vedas, than from the meaning of translation. It has convinced me that nothing can give us greater experience than the Original and that change totally our perceptions of our thought on Hindu religion and iconography and I am also convinced that every classical concept is rooted in the Vedas. Does it mean, there is a vacuum befor the Vedas. Certainly not but to explain them with evidence one has to enter the slippery space of speculation and nothing can be achieved by that enquiry. I am quite happy to stand on the solid ground.
Most of the articles in this volume are either on Vedic studies, or trace the roots of well known images of Hindu iconography. They show the Vedic tradition of adoring the nature's energies and are meant for the universal well being. The later worship is a linear development of these Vedic concepts and rituals. Two types of worship are recognized in ritual texts which are classified as worship for ones own self called ātmārtha pūja and the other for the community or the world called parārtha pūja. All temple worship fall under the later category.
The articles on Liṅga, Śiva, Balarāma, Rāma and Kṛṣṇa deal with concepts chronologically. The origin of Kārthikeya, the Goddesses, Varāha, are shown to have developed with their origin in Vedic ideas. The vague claims by some that many of them are from non Vedic sources are illustrated with speculative means. I have shown the Tamil Society was as much Vedic from its historical period as any other region of India. The articles on Indra worship in Tamilnadu from Silappatikāram included in this volume demonstrate that point
There is enough scope for enlarging each article into a full independent thesis. There is a need to remove many distortions in the present stage. An objective handling is desideratum. It is hoped that this work will stimulate more such studies in the future.
