Pųedmģt: [world-vedic] Temples, Yanjas, Murtis Od: Vrndavan Parker Datum: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 09:01:52 +0100 (CET) Komu: vediculture@yahoogroups.com Namaste. Below is a message exchange I had in regard to whether temples and deities are really a Vedic tradition vs the idea that Yanjas are the authentic Vedic method above and beyond other practices. Vrndavan Vrndavan Parker wrote: Pranams ji, I do not claim to be an expert in the field. My understanding of Vedic is that it is that which is the very basis of reality. It is beyond any human construct or artificailly imposed reality. It exists before and after the pralaya. As for Mandirs and Murtis, are there not such instances such as the kidnapping of Rukmini? These verses clearly state a Temple=Ambika-Grihat existed and clealry infers that Murtis of Shiva-Bhavani were present. Verses are from the Srimad Bhagavat Purana Canto 10 Chapter 53 TEXT 39 evam prema-kalā-baddhā vadanti sma puraukasah kanyā cāntah-purāt prāgād bhathair guptāmbikālayam -ambikā-ālayam - to the temple of Goddess Ambikā TEXT 40 padbhyām viniryayau drashthum bhavānyāh pāda-pallavam -drashthum - in order to see; bhavānyāh - of mother Bhavānī; pāda-pallavam - the lotus-petal feet; āsādya devī-sadanam dhauta-pāda-karāmbujā upaspris'ya s'ucih s'āntā pravives'āmbikāntikam āsādya - reaching; devī - of the goddess; sadanam - the residence; TEXT 45 tām vai pravayaso bālām vidhi-jn~ā vipra-yoshitah bhavānīm vandayām cakrur bhava-patnīm bhavānvitām tām - her; vai - indeed; pravayasah - elderly; bālām - the young girl; vidhi - of ritual injunctions; jn~āh - expert knowers; vipra - of brāhmanas; yoshitah - the wives; bhavānīm - to Goddess Bhavānī; vandayām cakruh - they led in offering respects; bhava-patnīm - the wife of Bhava (Lord Siva); bhava- anvitām - accompanied by Lord Bhava. TEXT 50 muni-vratam atha tyaktvā nis'cakrāmāmbikā-grihāt muni - of silence; vratam - her vow; atha - then; tyaktvā - giving up; nis'cakrāma - she exited; ambikā-grihāt - from the temple of Ambikā; So this is just one instance but I think its important because it involves Krishna directly and acts attributed to Lakshmi-Rukmini. Since Krsna descended to establish Dharma and is in Himself the essence of righteousness, even when looked at as a mere historical figure. Yet any instances of Krsna with temples and murtis is positive in nature. Never does Krsna, the personification of dharma and that which is righteous, disparage Temples or Murtis. Yet He does in fact speak against Indra Yanja and encourages worship of Govardhan itself. we could say He was speaking against yanjas yet this is incorrect as the many evidences of Krsna's involvement with yanjas later in life. He also disrupted the Danush yanja of Kamsa. This evidence seems to say that yanjas can be considered as negative as they were frequently used for personal empowerment and materially motivated tantrik rites. Whereas mandirs generally involve bhakti an act of selflessness and devotion. So I would suggest that yanjas are as good as those performing them whereas mandirs become actual sacred vortexes once the divinity is called forth to enter into the mandir thru the bhakti shakti of the bhakta. Thus even hundreds of years afterwards the murti or mandir remain potent regardless of the priests worthiness. I think the real issue at the heart of the matter is whether we have faith and recognition of the historical reality and authentic truth of the Vedic lineages. If we consider that all the various spiritual traditions arose out of the fallible minds and mundane visions of humans and are the ultimate underlying foundation of religion and belief, then so many theories will arise. However when rooted in the recognition that there is a higher and divine reality that is full of consciousness, awareness and love we have no doubt that this higher reality is and has been continuously interacting with humanity. Based on these authentic interactions with a higher reality humanity has developed authentic methodologies in order to enable us to develop and maintain ongoing connectivity to the Gods. The great Saints, the Scriptures and the Gurus. It is on these 3 pillars that we base our conclusions. Of course there is never absolute agreement but there is definitely a general consensus amongst the Vaishnava acharyas. The recent evidence confirming the historicity of the Mahabharata along with research that has shown that the works of Kautilya-Chanakya referenced the Bhagavata as well as the bhagavat purana correlating with the Mahabharata add to the validity of their use as source material. I am sure this is not inconclusive but I find the repeatedly scientifically validated statements of the Vedic texts and traditions to be more than reliable. I accept the acharyas with the personal credibility, integrity and dedication to a culture dedicated to Satyam, a culture that states that only Truth remains in kali yug, surely such a tradition and people can be counted on to speak and represent the truth. So I thank you for yr messsage and again thank you for yr kindness and sattvic nature towards me. Sincerely and with respect, Vrndavan