A pantheonic scroll of the Koreans from the Haein-Sa temple from 1862 CE depicting 124 deities being derived in part from the Hindu pantheon. The two prominent identical looking deities in this section are brahman (left) & indra (right)
The next section of scroll prominently depicts rudra (left): 3 heads holding trishUla&moon keeping with old iconography; rAjarAja (right) holding moon& sun. skanda center with lance. Known as Tongjin Posal or Wit'aechon in Korean the kaumAra tradition emerged from in east Asia
Daoxuan lüshi gantong lu, where the chInAchArya Daoxuan in the early 600s presented a peculiar narrative of the "conversion" of skanda to the nAstika heresy & as a deity whom the chIna bauddha-s must hold as their ideal. He is said to have miraculously appeared to the chIna &
revealed to him that their nAstika-mata was superior to the Indian one. Daoxuan is clearly mentioned by the chIna-s as having the seen the deity who is the general of the gods & has a child like form.
The lowermost panel of the Korean scroll of 124 deities
one of the chIna versions of the suvarNaprabhAsasUtra preserves an interesting protective spell for the readers of the sUtra (translated from the chIna by Li Xinjie; not there in public Sanskrit version):
Possessed of miraculous power
and great strength
indra, soma and yama,
vAyu, varuNa and *skanda*
viShNu and sarasvatI
prajApati and hutAshana
these protectors of the worlds
who are powerful and outshine every foe
day and night will offer protection without fail
skanda was the 1 of the deities (other being vaishravaNa) from old H pantheon transmitted via the nAstika cult to the Koreans who was also incorporated into the Korean shamanistic pantheon. (2nd deity central column in the iconography of Daoxuan); from Sujung Kim's excellent work
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
How did the Hinduization of the east happen? One hypothesis has been cultural diffusion. It is currently the preferred hypothesis among the "mainstream" academics of the Abrahamosphere. Additionally they emphasize a role for Buddhism while downplaying any biorxiv.org/content/10.110…
role of H. This hypothesis believes that it was largely a memetic transfer with little actual admixture of people from India. However, we know from at least as early as the 500s of BCE the H were deeply involved in East Asian trade. Moreover, the East Asian traditions themselves
e.g. that from Khmer acknowledge the role of the H kauNDinya in their foundation mythology (also found in chIna sources). This suggested that the H were physically moving into the east to found kingdoms. This latest article from Changmai et al shows the clear presence of an
good point: the tirumantiram represents a syncretic tradition combining the siddhAnta & the traipura systems. The drAviDa-stotra to vArAhI you cited from it is indeed clear on this matter. It inheres specifically from the kameshvarI lineage of the traipura system that was
particularly strong in the drAviDa country as presented in the lalitopAkhyAna. In that vArAhI & her 1000 pArShadI-s are incorporated independently of the other mAtR^i-s as daNDanAthA or the commander of the armies of kAmeshvarI. tripurA herself is praised by an epithet invoking
the acts of vArAhI as: vishukra-prANaharaNa-vArAhI-vIrya-nanditA | We also have evidence from the adoption by the nAstika-s of the widespread existence of an independent cult of vArAhI; some H temples to the deity throughout the country support that contention.
@arya_amsha I saw this twt earlier & was tempted to respond but desisted because 1 could ask: if a v2 or v3 claims to have studied the veda how do we know he really did so.. If we set that aside we can cite the following unambiguous cases: shrauta rituals- many v2s have done it close to
@arya_amsha modernity. e.g. the ashvamedha of jayasiMha-II, his successors continued shrauta rites down to the 1900s. Even in bauddha-dominant lankA we hear of vijayabAhu-2 performing shrauta somayAga in the 1100s. closer to our times in the late 1900s Jichkar, a v4 by birth adopting v2/3
@arya_amsha varNa performed a somayAga. In terms of actually studying the veda, the mAnasollAsa of someshvara-deva chAlukya clearly states that the v2 should study the shruti after upanayana. Did kings really do so around that time? We have the evidence from aparAditya the shilahara's
Issues related to this essay get discussed episodically on the TL. With due respect to @Telugutalli, there is 1 point where I disagree & another where (going against the grain of most H on this medium) I think H need to be more circumspect (trigger warning). 1st the disagreement
I do think history is important, and the failures at writing an objective history for yourself will result in others writing it & robing you of your past. What is meant by objective: when you write for yourself you have to eschew the impulse to fall prey to contrafactual accounts
just because they feel good. Now this can be difficult for a nation which has an undistinguished past;however, it is not an issue for the H to tell their own history factually as surviving ancient nation, when many of their cousins have been wiped out by the same forces that seek
This idea that somehow the marAThA v1s were doing something special, namely "secular v1ism" that was later emulated by other v1s in the peninsula is indeed a poorly supported idea coming out of "white indologists" & their fellow travelers. They have long spouted misconceptions
like the v1s dispersed throughout the subcontinent & beyond by earlier rulers being purveyors of a purely non-secular "vedism" or "tantrism". Any serious student will note that the v2s (real or honorary) were not doing this for some idealism like that which permeates occidental
academe (e.g. critical theories). Rather, it had a very practical function of utilizing v1s in a secular capacity as administrators. This "secular" function of the v1 goes back to the shruti & the marahaTTa v1s were simply 1 of the last great iterations of this phenomenon.Their
Reading the Popol Vuh brings to me a similar tragic sense as reading the work of Snorri Sturluson -- something lying at the terminus of a once rich heathen tradition -- a violent end (be it a bang or a whimper) at the hands of an ekarAkShasonnmAda. A mere glimpse of the rich
tradition leaving us hanging & wanting to know more but hitting the wall an extinction without fossilization. But what survives of the Maya tradition leaves us with a feel for how deep are the roots of natural religion& mythology in the history of human thought. By that very
realization it shows how utterly evil & pathological are the ekarAkShasa diseases of the mind and how every surviving heathen tradition should resist them. One can quickly glimpse some v.old elements like the origin mythologies, the wonder-working twin gods, nature of certain