This is an interesting question. I'll generalize the problem and attempt to provide a coherent answer from H insider POV.
https://twitter.com/halleyji/status/1859471147085275293
Problem: If you accept the proposition that a deity you worship is a later day addition to H pantheon, and perhaps even inspired by a contact with foreign tribe, how can you continue to worship without slipping into cognitive dissonance?
@halleyji please let me know if I captured the problem reasonably accurately.
Assuming this is indeed the question, here's how I'd approach.
1. Lemma-1: The devas have multitude of forms.
E.g. "rūpam rūpam bobhavīti" - (Indra) assumes multitude of forms. Note the intensive form of the verb. This signifies repetitions or simultaneously large number.
1. Lemma-1: The devas have multitude of forms.
E.g. "rūpam rūpam bobhavīti" - (Indra) assumes multitude of forms. Note the intensive form of the verb. This signifies repetitions or simultaneously large number.
ajāyamāno bahudhā vijāyate- unborn one (purusha) manifests in multiple forms.
Another example from a taittiriya brAhmana that explicitly states devas deposited their terrifying forms and that aggregate manifested rudra.
Another example from a taittiriya brAhmana that explicitly states devas deposited their terrifying forms and that aggregate manifested rudra.
Lemma 2: The multitude of forms can include forms of other devatas.
The unpacified agni in agnichayana is actually rudra in the terrifying form. He has to be pacified with shatarudrīya chant.
The unpacified agni in agnichayana is actually rudra in the terrifying form. He has to be pacified with shatarudrīya chant.
In later texts, the raudra form of Vishnu is nŕsimha. Even standalone hanuman is rudra and syncretizes with bhairava.
Lemma 3: Not all rūpas of devatas needed to have manifested already.
Lemma 3: Not all rūpas of devatas needed to have manifested already.
Tradition recognizes that a deva takes a form "for divine sport/līla", or for the benefit of a bhakta or even as a realization as a mantramUrti conceptualized by a mantra adept/deshika.
Tons of purANas, sthalapurANa and Agama have examples for this.
Tons of purANas, sthalapurANa and Agama have examples for this.
For example, there's no bhairava in RV, but a later day mantra teacher who visualizes a form of bhairava and the "Rishi" of a tantric mantra can deploy a mantra from RV as if it is for that specific bhairava in that specific form.
This form doesn't exist in RV and demonstrably
This form doesn't exist in RV and demonstrably
Later. Still sampradaya practitioners don't have an issue that this is a "later day addition" as the mantra teacher simply manifested a latent form using her mantrabala.
That's why syncretic forms of hanuman/bhairava as hanubhairava, nrsimha/rudra etc. exist.
Coming to gaNapati/skanda - rudra himself is a man-killer and cattle-killer. But he's also the medicine bringer and can heal once pacified.
His sons - the marut stormtroopers is the basis for later day evolution of skanda and vinayaka. Both of them are trouble makers - can bring obstacles or pediatric diseases. But once pacified, are graceful to the devotee.
"maruto gaNAnAM adhipatayaH te mA avantu".
"maruto gaNAnAM adhipatayaH te mA avantu".
Already maruts are "lords of the troops". GaNapati is just "lord of the troop". "devasenAnAm abhibhanjatInAM".. mantra to maruts reinforces the sena/army connection. Skanda literally is devasenApati.
The vaishNava ectype of the "lord of troops who's obstacle remover" is vishvaksena and accompanied by jayatsena (imo skanda equivalent). His retinue include horse-headed and elephant-headed deities.
Both skanda and ganapati can be explained as internal evolution of our deities without positing some hypothetical tribe with a hypothetical elephant headed God. To conceptualize a deva with elephant head you just need to be exposed to an elephant.
That's the parsimonious explanation.
To sum up- Even is a deity's form is temporally later, or even if it's inspired by a foreign religion, an H "doesn't adopt" the foreign god but sees the form as a new manifestation of deities he always worshipped. /fin
To sum up- Even is a deity's form is temporally later, or even if it's inspired by a foreign religion, an H "doesn't adopt" the foreign god but sees the form as a new manifestation of deities he always worshipped. /fin
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
