Hindu Narrative

**Hauma Hamiddha** · (This post was last modified: 05-17-2007, 08:59 PM by Hauma Hamiddha.)

There was a mention of the erotic sculpture in the Perur temple. Erotic sculptures are found in numerous temples all over India. In some cases there is a single small erotic depiction in one niche in the gopura or in others there cases there whole levels of the gopura devoted to them. I think the nAgeshvara temple in kumbhakoNam has a pretty impressive series. They may depict couples in coitus and other sexual play, single female figure as mentioned above, or males stimulating themselves etc.

<b>Why are these shown in the outer prakaras or gopuras of temples?</b>
If this question is asked to a modern Hindu you do not get one coherent answer:
-Some do not know they exist
-Some are ashamed
-Some say these are "tantric" temples.
-Others give explanations such as temples celebrate fertility or you give up sexual desires in the outer wall and enter the temple to only see the devatA or that it is for sex education.
Perhaps this lack of coherence in the answer reflects a very important break in the narrative amongst Hindus in this regard?

If you look at the texts of chitra-kala they do mention that painting erotic pictures (or probably making images) is a legitimate form of decoration as it represents plenty, prosperity and happiness.

Alternative a female figure exposing the yoni could be a lajjA-gaurI- a fertility symbol.

05-17-2007, 09:46 PM

Indeed - since this mystery probably does represent a loss of narrative - let me cross post an explanation given by an old friend in another forum

QUOTE..it is not at all unusual -- except for it's location.

What we need to recognise -- to begin with -- is that all of this, in toto, was meant as a form of visual and symbolic communication. When we go back that far in time, more than 1,500 years ago, we see that the mentality itselfÂ is more symbolic than analytical ( as it is with us today). Therefore the expression was symbolic -- much like the traffic signs we have today on our highways indicating a U turn or bend etc.

In the classical South Indian style of temple architecture, we have the 4 "Gopurams" or entrances to the temple and typically the entrance Gopuram ( facing the East) has 7 levels or storeys of which the first two can have explicit sexual imagery. As we go higher to the upper storeys the theme becomes less sensual, and more "lofty". The idea is to depict the usual path taken in the "Godward" climb of a human being through the paths of hedonistic pleasure initially; and for those who can see beyond it , the greater vistas of understanding and experiencing the complex warp and woof of cosmic existence.

What may seem to us as titillation was often notÂ intended that way. It was mere depiction of the "way of all flesh" as well as what can lie beyond for those who were able to generate enough psychological "escape velocity" to go beyond it.

05-17-2007, 11:35 PM

Posted edited by self as it contained unnecessary humor.

05-18-2007, 01:06 AM

QUOTELies may require to be told, but your ultimate goal is via no lies. Untruth will only get you as far as hudaibiya got anyone. 
In place of lying, better say nothing. I agree, ultimate goal should be honest and truthful life.

05-18-2007, 08:45 AM

QUOTE(ramana @ May 17 2007, 11:40 PM)Swamy, Humor is good to lighten up things but in serious discussion it distracts. So if you want to contribute then do so but with some care for others. thanks, ramana
[right][snapback]68939[/snapback][/right]


What a coincidence that the question of humor came up just when I was going to raise the question of humor (seriously) as part of a narrative that needs to be documented and recorded.

We get fed with tales about how Sanskrit is dead, but few Indians say how it lives on, both as part of regional languages, and as people who can understand sanskrit to varying degrees.

When I was a boy I was taught (by elders) the following sanskrit poem, which I will write in English script and then translate. I am not sure if the grammar is totally correct.

QUOTE<i>
"dharram-bharram" bhayam naasti
"kuya-puya" cha madhyamam
"thuss"-aakaram maha ghoram
nis-shabdam prana-sankataha
</i>

The poem refers to farting, and the relationship between sound and stink

"dharram-bharram" bhayam naasti: the loudest farts should not arouse fear

"kuya-puya" cha madhyamam: the squeaky farts are "medium"

"thuss"-aakaram maha ghoram: the farts that come as a hiss are very dangerous

nis-shabdam prana-sankataha: soundless farts are life-threatening/deadly

05-18-2007, 09:57 AM

QUOTE(sengotuvel @ May 17 2007, 03:10 PM)Ultimately - and no matter how painful the truth may be, lies are not allowed in Hinduism. Lies and untruth are the path to ignorance. The religion is old enough to be very comprehensive in its depth and breadth, but has had the time to mature and come up with stunning summaries of what it's all about.

I am referring to:

Asatoma sadgamaya (lead me from a-sat, untruth, to satya (truth)
Tamasoma jyotirgamaya (lead me from tamas, darkness, to jyoti, light)
mrutyorma amritamgamaya (lead me from mrityu, death/mortality, to a-mrita (immortality)

Lies may require to be told, but your ultimate goal is via no lies. Untruth will only get you as far as hudaibiya got anyone.
[right][snapback]68916[/snapback][/right]


Hmm..
Actually, the Mahabharatha's Yudhistra & Ashwathama episode is actually misunderstood.

The point there, as explained by Purva_Acharyas is as follows:

Man is supposed to live by the rules of Dharma.

However, at one stage of Spiritual progress, Dharma ceases to exist as cardinal, and the ultimate aim of Salvation becomes supreme.

For highly realised souls, very near to the object of realisation, Dharma becomes an impediment, they have to reject Dharma and TRANSCEND it, because Dharma belongs to this realm.

In Bhakthi tradition, at advanced stages of Bhakthi, one does not observe the rules of society, tradition or mundane dharma after reaching a stage of unpolluted, unrestrained love for God.

The love of Gopis for Lord Krishna is one such example, their love was more supreme than their obligations of faithfulness to their own husbands. Their love 'transcended' even the supreme Dharma of their 'wifehoods'.

Similarly, Yudhistra was given a chance by Lord Krishna to stop giving supreme allegiance to Dharma, give up his high stool and just spontaneously do whatever is to be done for the SOLE PLEASURE OF THE LORD.

This is the supreme aim of a Bhakta, to do anything and everything for the singular aim of his Lord's pleasure.

In Saiva traditions, there are many examples where Lord Siva is pleased more by the devotion of his devotees even when they had committed sacrilages.

Kannapa Nayanar (Thinnar), one of the four Navar in Saiva Siddhanta is another example.

Truth in this material world is not supreme since it is tainted by time. In this material world, truth is modified and conditioned by many factors like relevance, observership, relativity, authority of many scriptures, etc.

Therefore any 'Truth' in this material manifestation is only a 'shadow' of the Supreme and cannot be said to be ultimate.

The Upanishadis verse on Sat refers clearly to the Lord himself, not to any abstract quality like truth. It is representative of Knowledge and realization. It is an english error to translate Sat as truth.

Similarly, the verse Satyamevajayathe translated into Truth alone triumphs is very wrong. (as per an Authority on Scriptures, not my own opinion) Falsehood by its own nature has not existence. Only truth exists, so there is no question of triumph. A non existent entity can never challenge an existence.
It should actually read: God-Knowledge alone triumphs

Hope I am faithful to the traditions, all mistakes are mine.

05-18-2007, 10:08 AM

QUOTE(Raju @ May 10 2007, 11:16 PM)Lots of Gods are depicted as blue in color. Any particular reason behind it ?
[right][snapback]68565[/snapback][/right]


Simply because on the Authority of Scriptures, they are in fact, blue in colour.

All the explainations that blue is the expanse of the sky are spurious, without scriptural basis, conjured up by embarrased macaulites trying to justify their religion in terms that the westerners can understand.

THere is no need to explain our Gods in abstract and symbolism ways, its corruption and denial of our scriptures, which explicitly explain to us that it is real History or itihasa, not fanciful mythology with room for symbolic interpretation.

Any questions?

05-18-2007, 10:24 AM

QUOTEAny questions?

Yeah, Welcome back <!--emo& Smile

--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' />

**Hauma Hamiddha** · 05-18-2007, 10:36 AM

Hope to see you participating again Hayagriva.

Bodhi · (This post was last modified: 05-18-2007, 10:25 PM by Bodhi.)

QUOTE(Hyagriva @ May 18 2007, 12:27 AM)For highly realised souls, very near to the object of realisation, Dharma becomes an impediment, they have to reject Dharma and TRANSCEND it, because Dharma belongs to this realm.
[right][snapback]68961[/snapback][/right]


QUOTE(Hyagriva @ May 18 2007, 12:27 AM)Similarly, Yudhistra was given a chance by Lord Krishna to stop giving supreme allegiance to Dharma, give up his high stool and just spontaneously do whatever is to be done for the SOLE PLEASURE OF THE LORD.
[right][snapback]68961[/snapback][/right]


Awesome explanation! Thanks Hyagriva.

Yudhishthira represented Dharma personified. He was not known as Dharmaraj without a reason. He sacrificed all for Dharma, but Dharma for nothing. And yet, as explained above, Dharma has to be transcended too!

Above is close to the discourse in Adi Parva given to Yudhisthira when he was a young and tender student.

Mahabharata relates, that when young Puru princes were learning under Guru Drona, once Bheeshma/Dhritrashtra asked for the progress of the princes. Drona reported that all others were doing well, except for Yudhisthira, who was not able to learn satisfactorily and was falling behind others in the lessons. Surprised, Bheeshma went to councel the young boy to diagnose the problem. When asked, what was the trouble, Yudhishthira explained he was having trouble with the first lesson, and could not yet learn that. Not having perfected the first lesson, he was unable to proceed to the next, he said. The first lesson was 'satyam vad dharmam char' -'speak truth and follow the dharma', and Yudhishthira had taken it upon himself that until he perfected this, he would not move on.

Such was Yudhishthira's insistence upon Satya and Dharma. But one has to transend ALL, and finally Sri Krishna helped him do that.

05-18-2007, 09:34 PM

QUOTE(Bodhi @ May 17 2007, 10:09 AM)I don't know what villagu means in Tamil though.

Means "separate". The tamil brahmin dialect is far more Sanskritized than other tamil dialects.

05-18-2007, 09:38 PM

QUOTE(Hyagriva @ May 18 2007, 10:08 AM)Simply because on the Authority of Scriptures, they are in fact, blue in colour.

Can you cite the texts or references? thanks.

05-18-2007, 09:49 PM

QUOTE(Hyagriva @ May 18 2007, 09:57 AM)In Bhakthi tradition, at advanced stages of Bhakthi, one does not observe the rules of society, tradition or mundane dharma after reaching a stage of unpolluted, unrestrained love for God.

Similarly, Yudhistra was given a chance by Lord Krishna to stop giving supreme allegiance to Dharma, give up his high stool and just spontaneously do whatever is to be done for the SOLE PLEASURE OF THE LORD.

This is the supreme aim of a Bhakta, to do anything and everything for the singular aim of his Lord's pleasure.


Well, personally I do not gel with the bhakti tradition. Well that is me. Do we exist just to please the Lord, and dance at his (her?) whims and fancies? I am not so sure.

What is going to prevent people from kicking the stools that they stand on and proclaim whatever they do is because of their supreme love towards their gods. Suicide bombers of Islam are then blowing themselves and others, to show obedience to their god and reach him, discarding mundane dharma of the society we live in.

QUOTEThe love of Gopis for Lord Krishna is one such example, their love was more supreme than their obligations of faithfulness to their own husbands. Their love 'transcended' even the supreme Dharma of their 'wifehoods'.

So can a adulterer confess of such kind of love towards her masculine neighbor.

05-18-2007, 10:11 PM

Talking about humor and such, I remembered playing a game with my toddler. This game has been played in my family circles for ages. I have a question to.

The game goes like this, a young kid cups his palms in such fashion as if to catch something (imagine a wicket keeper). His opponent keeps playfully punching into his cupped palms while giving out cues in a sing song fashion. According to the game rule, the kid can catch only when the correct cue is sounded out. It goes out like this

QUOTEAmma koothu,
Dhimma koothu,
Patti koothu,
Peran koothu,
Pethi koothu,
Pilayar koothu,
Peedichiko koothu


English translation
QUOTEMom's punch,
Dhimma punch ?????
Grand ma's punch,
Grand son's punch,
Grand daughter's punch,
Lord Ganesha's punch,
<b>Catch-me punch. (the cue to catch the fist)</b>


The player punching varies the cues in order to perplex the kid. But usually they do not change the order of the cues, as it builds an expectation in the mind of the kid to as what is to come next and prepare him/her with glee for the catch.

It is not a serious game, and I have not seen it being played for more than a few minutes.

If people have heard or played this game, my question what is that "Dhimma koothu". Is it there just to rhyme with "Amma"?

05-18-2007, 10:38 PM

Nevertheless he refused to enter heaven and leave the dog(dharma) that had followed him outside. What is the lesson here?

QUOTE(SwamyG @ May 18 2007, 09:49 PM)<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Hyagriva @ May 18 2007, 09:57 AM)In Bhakthi tradition, at advanced stages of Bhakthi, one does not observe the rules of society, tradition or mundane dharma after reaching a stage of unpolluted, unrestrained love for God.

Similarly, Yudhistra was given a chance by Lord Krishna to stop giving supreme allegiance to Dharma, give up his high stool and just spontaneously do whatever is to be done for the SOLE PLEASURE OF THE LORD.

This is the supreme aim of a Bhakta, to do anything and everything for the singular aim of his Lord's pleasure.


Well, personally I do not gel with the bhakti tradition. Well that is me. Do we exist just to please the Lord, and dance at his (her?) whims and fancies? I am not so sure.

What is going to prevent people from kicking the stools that they stand on and proclaim whatever they do is because of their supreme love towards their gods. Suicide bombers of Islam are then blowing themselves and others, to show obedience to their god and reach him, discarding mundane dharma of the society we live in.

QUOTEThe love of Gopis for Lord Krishna is one such example, their love was more supreme than their obligations of faithfulness to their own husbands. Their love 'transcended' even the supreme Dharma of their 'wifehoods'.

So can a adulterer confess of such kind of love towards her masculine neighbor.
[right][snapback]68980[/snapback][/right]
</div>

ramana · 05-18-2007, 11:08 PM

Is there any significance to of the blue color of the lotus blossom? Neelam kamalam.

05-19-2007, 12:24 AM

blue is also the color of the throat vishudha chakra. The seven chakras each associated with a different rainbow color when balanced combine to form pure white light but what is the significance of each color associated with a given chakra?

05-19-2007, 12:42 AM

Thank you Rhytha! And HH!!
Am glad to be here, finally back to civilization and uninterrupted internet.
A couple of years in a rural village makes anybody feel aged and wiser. India will never be the same for me now. <!--emo& Smile

--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' />

QUOTE(SwamyG @ May 18 2007, 09:49 PM)Well, personally I do not gel with the bhakti tradition. Well that is me. Do we exist just to please the Lord, and dance at his (her?) whims and fancies? I am not so sure.


Hmm. You got it quite wrong. We exist to to enjoy ourselves.
The nature of the soul is to enjoy. Hinduism is unique that it recognises enjoyment of supreme bliss as the very nature of the soul. Thats the precisely why every living being seeks pleasure and shuns pain. Semitic religions just got it wrong - We exist solely for the purpose of enjoyment.
(but I need to add: that by denying ourselves mundane and ordinary pleasure which bind us to their reactions and keep us in illusion, we free ourselves to strive & obtain permanent and ultimate bliss which is God-realization)

As parts of the whole, there is exchange of deep love between the Bhaktha and his Lord, who are one and identical, separated to enjoy each other. This love is transcendental, therefore free from illusion and its effect.. and..
It is NOT ONE SIDED, but cuts both ways. The Lord becomes the servant of his devotee, tries to please him while the Devotee tries to reciprocate at a higher level.
Say, like the exchange of love between a mother and her child. The mother does not please the child for the only purpose of pleasing the child, but because it gives her immense pleasure too, see her child enjoy.

Lord says: I see u devotional and I raise mine to you by two.

The game goes on and on, the loving exchange between them keeps increasing to no end. Such is the wonder and joy of Bhakthi.

Every single joy and pleasure of THIS world is a pale illusion of the real joy of our true self in the Spiritual realm. Due to Illusion, we think that the meagre joys of this world are supreme, while they are only a mirror image.
Similarly, Adultery and the passion involved in adultery is so intense that it is almost akin to the love of a devotee for his lord. The intensity, thrill, and pleasure of a illicit relationship makes it so similar to what a Devotee feels for God, that this analogy is used widely for the love of God by most Acharyas.

Of course, it requires much understanding on our part and lots of reading to even touch the topic of the adulterous love the Gopis had for Lord Krishna. This lust is considered the highest form of devotional love, but there are much to learn about it. I am not qualified to talk about it, nor is this forum the best place to discuss it.

05-19-2007, 02:59 AM

QUOTE(ramana @ May 18 2007, 11:08 PM)Is there any significance to of the blue color of the lotus blossom? Neelam kamalam.
[right][snapback]68986[/snapback][/right]


from http://www.flowersofindia.net/mythology.html

'In the 'Ramayana Rama wanted the blessings of Devi Durga . He came to know that the Goddess would be pleased only if she is worshipped with one hundred 'NeelKamal' or blue lotuses. Rama, after travelling the whole world, could gather only ninety nine of them. He finally decided to offer one of his eyes, which resembled blue lotuses. Durga, being pleased with the devotion of Rama, appeared before him and blessed him.'

05-19-2007, 03:29 AM

Is there a reaon why this forum is not the best place to discuss this subject matter?

In the mother-child analogy, does the child do everything to please the mother?

If the Bhaktha and the Lord are one and identical, then why insist to "do whatever is to be done for the SOLE PLEASURE OF THE LORD" ?

QUOTEThe game goes on and on, the loving exchange between them keeps increasing to no end. Such is the wonder and joy of Bhakthi.

I mean no disrespect to you or others, but from my point of view I see this as a "fixation" over one particular individual.

Analogies given by acharyas are fine and dandy. Well there is no doubt of the kinkiness in adultery. I know you are not suggesting an adharmic society where there are no rules, inhibitions and laws. But if everybody is to experience the supreme bliss and resort to lustful acts, the society wouldn't be the way it is now.

QUOTEThis lust is considered the highest form of devotional love, but there are much to learn about it. 
How come only the girls get to exhibit this kind of love? Are there any instances where males have sort this sort of adulterous love with say Parvati, Lakshmi, Sita...? Well Ravana lusted for Sita and paid a heavy price. I have heard about Sanskrit poems, but even there the poet had to pay a price.
Pardon me for inducing humor, but if I were to go about saying such things towards any of the goddesses, after convincing my wife; my mom would skin me alive first when she hears this. I doubt she would be the mother in the mother-child analogy and allow me to enjoy. For some strange reason if she lives me to live, the VHP-Bajarang Dal-RSS would probably throw stones at my house.

Login




Remember me Lost Password?