About the discussions above (other than that on Arya):
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Portuguese-imported potatoes and tomatoes and chillis "Vedic cooking".<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->That is indeed funny.
For instance, potatoes are from native Americans (am very indebted to them).
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->So no, reincarnation was not part of Sanâtana ("eternal") Dharma, it was an innovation. (Or as a believer might put it, a "discovery": first the notion wasn't there, then some yogi saw the "truth" of reincarnation, then the idea spread, while more and more practitioners learnt the technique to "verify" the "fact" of reincarnation.)<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Umm, well, that's not it. The Vedas are neither the origin nor the sum of all that is Sanatana Dharma.
In S India, Shiva has a lot of avataras (see for instance how these avataras are displayed in the Meenakshi temple) - far more than MahaVishnu's famous 10. MahaVishnu also has many more than the major 10.
But now that I've said it, I'll doubtless be hearing from someone how "Shaivites would have got the idea from Vaishnavites who only came upon the idea sometime after X" and how this reminds them of something or other they encountered elsewhere.
Sigh. Never mind.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Worse, even in the Ramayana and Mahabharata, philological analysis has shown that Rama and Krishna were originally just humn beings, heroes
alright, but human mortals nonetheless. Only in the latest-added
parts do they start becoming divine incarnations. Vishnu's penchant
for incarnating among us humans, now a core belief of the majority of
Hindus, is a post-Vedic innovation.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->king Sudas who defeated the Ten Kings, was an imperialist who had invaded their lands.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Now that that's all been cleared up:
1. It is obvious that Parashurama was much more of an imperialist and far worse besides.
2. On with The Dredging.
3. Vedas are just bothersome ur-history sometimes centred around some crappy characters, but with the occasional pretty little ditty thrown in. (Wait, I'm sure someone famous said something along those lines a decent while back?)
Oh, if only I could be a cheap 'Hindu', how much money I should have then. Hey, that sounds like the catchy title of a song that will sell.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Portuguese-imported potatoes and tomatoes and chillis "Vedic cooking".<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->That is indeed funny.
For instance, potatoes are from native Americans (am very indebted to them).
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->So no, reincarnation was not part of Sanâtana ("eternal") Dharma, it was an innovation. (Or as a believer might put it, a "discovery": first the notion wasn't there, then some yogi saw the "truth" of reincarnation, then the idea spread, while more and more practitioners learnt the technique to "verify" the "fact" of reincarnation.)<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Umm, well, that's not it. The Vedas are neither the origin nor the sum of all that is Sanatana Dharma.
In S India, Shiva has a lot of avataras (see for instance how these avataras are displayed in the Meenakshi temple) - far more than MahaVishnu's famous 10. MahaVishnu also has many more than the major 10.
But now that I've said it, I'll doubtless be hearing from someone how "Shaivites would have got the idea from Vaishnavites who only came upon the idea sometime after X" and how this reminds them of something or other they encountered elsewhere.
Sigh. Never mind.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Worse, even in the Ramayana and Mahabharata, philological analysis has shown that Rama and Krishna were originally just humn beings, heroes
alright, but human mortals nonetheless. Only in the latest-added
parts do they start becoming divine incarnations. Vishnu's penchant
for incarnating among us humans, now a core belief of the majority of
Hindus, is a post-Vedic innovation.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->king Sudas who defeated the Ten Kings, was an imperialist who had invaded their lands.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Now that that's all been cleared up:
1. It is obvious that Parashurama was much more of an imperialist and far worse besides.
2. On with The Dredging.
3. Vedas are just bothersome ur-history sometimes centred around some crappy characters, but with the occasional pretty little ditty thrown in. (Wait, I'm sure someone famous said something along those lines a decent while back?)
Oh, if only I could be a cheap 'Hindu', how much money I should have then. Hey, that sounds like the catchy title of a song that will sell.
Death to traitors.