1. More on this:
[quote name='Husky' date='02 November 2011 - 09:58 PM' timestamp='1320250838' post='113574']- Ashwattha being recognised as a sacred tree by Hindus - with great symbology to do with knowledge of the aatmaa/bypassing samsara - goes back Way-way. And Gita - which mentions the Ashwattha VrukSha in such a manner with backreference - is still pre-Buddhist, Romila Tapars notwithstanding.
Knowing (the nature of) *The* ashwattha tree is associated with true knowledge. And as seen above, Krishna in the Gita says this was already known about the tree from pre-existing Hindu texts.
[...]
- Finally, as for the Hindu Agamic worship: the Ashwattha/Pipala/Bodhi VrukSha (and related strains) worshipped by Hindus is an ancient Hindu practice. It is viewed and worshipped identical to the Shivalingam: it is the Trimoorti (i.e. the Parabrahmam) in the same order they appear in the Shivalingam. Also seen entirely as the ParamapuruSha Vishnu. As well as (always) all the Hindu Devas together. And this is even literally spelled out:
=> The RH upaniShad belonging to the (K)YV, repeats where the Tree worship of the Hindoos comes from (still the same trimoorti, but the identification of the parts is different, but this occurs commonly, as it represents a whole anyway, just as the Trimoorti/sarvadevAH represent a whole - the Tree):
(Quite similar to the meaning of the Shivalingam.
And the full text from which I stole the above brief excerpt from, describes the fuller meaning of the Shivalingam/shivamoorti too: =umA-Shiva; =Trimoorti (+wives implicit); =indeed all the Hindoo Gods.)
2. (This point is not on Buddhism.) The same upaniShat also has something to say that appears to support the bold bit in the following that I blabbed once about the Maheshwara moorti at the Elephanta caves:
[quote name='Husky' date='02 April 2011 - 10:15 PM' timestamp='1301762232' post='111301']
Actually, the Panchavaktra Shiva is also entirely Shiva containing all the 5 - including 3 "visible" - aspects of the Hindu Divine himself*, but the first two aspects can and indeed are identified with the first 2 Gods of the Trimoorti even when just Shiva is considered. Also, Vamadeva can for the same reason be identified with *Vishnu*: since Vishnu like Uma is on the left half of the body (both in ShankaraNarayana and Shiva being VishnuVallabha).
(* Just like a great many other Hindu Gods are similarly said to do, e.g. Saraswati who, being the very embodiment of the Parabrahman and the Vedam, herself assumes the roles of all 3 visible activities of the same that are usually equated with the Trimoorti, hence she IS the Trimoorti/Parabrahman)[/quote]
Compare the above bit on Shiva above with the following (from RHU of the KYV) - explains the Maheshamoorti:
3. And:
[quote name='Husky' date='08 November 2011 - 09:18 PM' timestamp='1320766832' post='113631']- Buddhists didn't invent the shaven head/beard. Hindus had even several types of shaven heads among them. But it's true that Buddhist monks didn't have "beard and long hair", which is something Hindus did and still do have.
- As for the manjal orangish saffron garment of the Hindus - it's not "red" - Sadhus have long worn it.
[...]
Actually, apparently the borrowing of the robe has been shown to be in the opposite direction to that which Romani alleges. The following [color="#0000FF"]from Sudheer Birodkar's page on Buddhism[/color] (Birodkar apparently gets referenced by the Encyclopaedia Britannica - I think it was - as a reference site. Not that this would be a compliment, but since the Britannica is not known for being biased in favour of Hindus on anything, the following can be posted):
[quote name='Husky' date='02 November 2011 - 09:58 PM' timestamp='1320250838' post='113574']- Ashwattha being recognised as a sacred tree by Hindus - with great symbology to do with knowledge of the aatmaa/bypassing samsara - goes back Way-way. And Gita - which mentions the Ashwattha VrukSha in such a manner with backreference - is still pre-Buddhist, Romila Tapars notwithstanding.
Quote:OordhvamUlam-adaHshAkham-ashvatthaM prAhur-avyayam | ChandAmsi yasya parNAni yas taM veda sa veda-vit ||
Knowing (the nature of) *The* ashwattha tree is associated with true knowledge. And as seen above, Krishna in the Gita says this was already known about the tree from pre-existing Hindu texts.
[...]
- Finally, as for the Hindu Agamic worship: the Ashwattha/Pipala/Bodhi VrukSha (and related strains) worshipped by Hindus is an ancient Hindu practice. It is viewed and worshipped identical to the Shivalingam: it is the Trimoorti (i.e. the Parabrahmam) in the same order they appear in the Shivalingam. Also seen entirely as the ParamapuruSha Vishnu. As well as (always) all the Hindu Devas together. And this is even literally spelled out:
Quote:moolato brahmarUpAya madhyato viShNurUpiNe | agrataH shivarUpAya vR^ikSharAjAya te namaH ||[/quote]
mUlebrahmA tvachi viShNuH shAkhAyAM sha~Nkara eva cha | patre patre sarvadevAH vAsudevAya te namaH ||
=> The RH upaniShad belonging to the (K)YV, repeats where the Tree worship of the Hindoos comes from (still the same trimoorti, but the identification of the parts is different, but this occurs commonly, as it represents a whole anyway, just as the Trimoorti/sarvadevAH represent a whole - the Tree):
Quote:asya trailokyavR^ikShasya bhUmau viTapashAkhinaH |
agraM madhyaM tathA mUlaM viShNubrahmamaheshvarAH ||
(Quite similar to the meaning of the Shivalingam.
And the full text from which I stole the above brief excerpt from, describes the fuller meaning of the Shivalingam/shivamoorti too: =umA-Shiva; =Trimoorti (+wives implicit); =indeed all the Hindoo Gods.)
2. (This point is not on Buddhism.) The same upaniShat also has something to say that appears to support the bold bit in the following that I blabbed once about the Maheshwara moorti at the Elephanta caves:
[quote name='Husky' date='02 April 2011 - 10:15 PM' timestamp='1301762232' post='111301']
Actually, the Panchavaktra Shiva is also entirely Shiva containing all the 5 - including 3 "visible" - aspects of the Hindu Divine himself*, but the first two aspects can and indeed are identified with the first 2 Gods of the Trimoorti even when just Shiva is considered. Also, Vamadeva can for the same reason be identified with *Vishnu*: since Vishnu like Uma is on the left half of the body (both in ShankaraNarayana and Shiva being VishnuVallabha).
(* Just like a great many other Hindu Gods are similarly said to do, e.g. Saraswati who, being the very embodiment of the Parabrahman and the Vedam, herself assumes the roles of all 3 visible activities of the same that are usually equated with the Trimoorti, hence she IS the Trimoorti/Parabrahman)[/quote]
Compare the above bit on Shiva above with the following (from RHU of the KYV) - explains the Maheshamoorti:
Quote:rudrasya dakshiNe pArshve ravirbrahmA trayo.agnayaH ||
vAmapArshve umA devI viShNuH somo.api te trayaH |
yA umA sA svayaM viShNuryo viShNuH sa hi chandramAH ||
3. And:
[quote name='Husky' date='08 November 2011 - 09:18 PM' timestamp='1320766832' post='113631']- Buddhists didn't invent the shaven head/beard. Hindus had even several types of shaven heads among them. But it's true that Buddhist monks didn't have "beard and long hair", which is something Hindus did and still do have.
- As for the manjal orangish saffron garment of the Hindus - it's not "red" - Sadhus have long worn it.
[...]
Actually, apparently the borrowing of the robe has been shown to be in the opposite direction to that which Romani alleges. The following [color="#0000FF"]from Sudheer Birodkar's page on Buddhism[/color] (Birodkar apparently gets referenced by the Encyclopaedia Britannica - I think it was - as a reference site. Not that this would be a compliment, but since the Britannica is not known for being biased in favour of Hindus on anything, the following can be posted):
Quote:The yellow coloured robes that the Buddhist Bhikkus donned were borrowed from the Saffron robes of the Hindu ascetic. Although as for the Buddhists the yellow colour was chosen to represent an autumn leaf which was once green but has inevitably turned yellow in conformation with the law that everything born has to decay and pass away.[/quote]