There are so many versions of the Ramayana written thousands of years apart. Which version of the Ramayana does it reference Muruga or Karthikeya? There are also so many different storylines of Ramayana (the Buddhist variant of Ramayana does not indicate an abduction of Sita. The obduction of Sita shows Ravana, who is beloved by the dark skinned people, in bad light). The original version in Sanskrit (approximately 4th century BC) does not mention Murugan. The Sanskrit version is also not written in a South Indian context.

It is a fairly simple statement. There was no one in India who considered himself to be a Hindu before the 15th century. There were Shivas, Vaishnavas, etc. But no Hindu.

Clearly I am not stating that all people who visit Thirumanla are Buddhists. A vast majority of the people who visit the temple today consider themselves as Hindus. Only a small number of visitors consider themselves as Vaishnavites or Buddhists. Many who visit the temple follow traditions that reflect modern day Hindu customs in addition to Vaishnava and Buddhist customs.

I normally avoid sites like Wikipedia. Dissent and contradictory information is rarely published on this site (I tried to add information in the Wikipedia site about Kerala and Saint Thomas. The story about Saint Thomas visiting Kerala and converting Brahmins to Christianity is false. But I was not allowed to).

You should not speak for democracy or against hurting anybody’s sentiments any more than I do. I do not agree with you that Jamanadas is using his book to vent against upper caste people in India. So the statements you make like “he himself being a Buddhist, he purposely calls the Idol in Tirumala as Buddhist Idol in order to hurt the Hindu sentiments” are just your opinions. It is not based on facts. So you use freedom of expression, democracy and the internet to make such statements but you want others not to do it if it is not in sync with your beliefs. So instead of lecturing others you should spend sometime listening to your own lectures!

All your points about Buddha can be said about Vishnu as well. Is there evidence to show that Vishnu existed? Is there any proof that the idol is Venkateshwara and that Venkateshwara is an avatar of Vishnu?

Lord Venkateshwara is standing. He has only two hands (the Shankha and Chakra) are just placed in the imaginary third and fourth hand in the back which we can never see. It is clear from Vishnava traditions that the idol had no weapons initially. The two hands that we can see are showing Mudras that are closely associated with Buddhism (Avalokitesvara). Some of the traditions followed at the temple (like shaving head) contradict Vaishnava beliefs. The way the idol is displayed (standing with two hands, showing Varada Mudra and no weapons) also violate what tradition says about how Vishnu should be displayed. Unlike most other Vaishnava temples, Tirumala temple has no minor Vaishnava saints or deities.

The iconography governing the way Lord Vishnu is to be displayed (icons, idols and paintings) is very strict and is detailed in scripture after scripture. Yet some have claimed he can be shown with two hands and no weapons. Scriptures like Agni Purana detail 24 forms of Vishnu none of which involves depicting Him with two hands. If Vishnu can be shown with two hands (there is very little tradition or scripture to back it up) then why is the temple authorities going to great lengths to show this idol with four hands (when it has only two) and with weapons (when originally it did not have any weapons)? The answer is obvious.

The traditions and customs followed at the temple today clearly show the mixed heritage of the temple.

Coming to democracy, I do respect the democratic view point but if in the name of democracy, religious sentiments of people are hurt, then its not democracy anymore. But automatically turns to hypocrisy.

And, I am not talking abut what Jamanadas has written about Upper cast or lower cast in his book because I am not a believer in the caste system myself but, you have to agree that he has used the book as a medium to vent out his frustration and anger against the upper caste. And, he himself being a Buddhist, he purposely calls the Idol in Tirumala as Buddhist Idol inorder to hurt the Hindu sentiments. It is ironical, that he wrote this book without even visiting the Shrine at least in his lifetime to verify the facts what he proudly presents with such confidence and pride.

I can say Buddha never existed and then collate some false information and write a book about it but it will be very untrue because there is historical proof that, He did exist. Similarly, just by collating some artificial facts and saying that the Idol was of Buddhist origin is wrong and unacceptable. In plain words, there is no proof that, Idol is of Buddhist origin and this adopted controversy is a very recent one, not the history of the Temple as you have misinterpreted.

Again, I am not a upper caste Hindu and have nothing against Buddhism. But then, this draws to a question, who are you ?

Internet is an open medium and anyone can present anything be it false or baseless but then, it does not make it right or change the facts. Its not about keeping quiet but about choosing wisely where to spend the energy, in something where there is truth. You speak of Buddha, Mahavir, Ramanuja but you are missing the important part – They were crusaders of the Ultimate Truth. And, reform can never be based on deception, concocted, spurious, forged, untruthful things.

You have named the article “Thirumala Venkateshwara Temple: From Buddhism to Hinduism”. Have you even ever try to verify the facts that proudly present here or are these just based on Jamanadas’s book. If so, then how can you talk of reform when you yourself have not verified whats the truth.

Anyways, I can write a hundred replies to yours but its a mindless chase. For people who do not want to open their eyes and see the moon, it does not matter if its a full moon day or not.

I completely disagree with your assessment. Indian is a democratic society and there is a lot of space in our society for debates, discussions and disagreements. For me and many others the journey (in this case the discussion) is more stimulating than the destination or the end result.

You are trying to straddle both sides of the fence. You talk about violence committed in the past in the name of religion, you do not seem to understand the fuss about whether the idol is Buddha or Vishnu and you also say that I should not hurt the religious sentiments of people. But in the very same breadth you state “do not hurt the sentiments of millions of people by writing such baseless facts based on some book written by K. Jamanadas, which was totally written with a firm single agenda to glorify Buddhism and defile Hinduism”.

Jamanadas book presents the Buddhist viewpoint. Jamanadas is also known for speaking very strongly about the oppression of the lower castes by the upper caste in India. His views and opinions, particularly if you are an upper caste Hindu, are not very easy to digest. But this does not mean that he is glorifying Buddhism and defiling Hinduism as you put it. By talking about Jamanadas’s book you are also trying to insinuate that the controversy over this temple is recent. It is over a thousand years old. If you do not care about whether the idol is Buddha or Vishnu then why do you feel so strongly about Jamanadas and his book?

Do you know what hurts my religious sentiments as a Hindu? The fact that you can pay hundreds of Rupees and have a darshan quickly while the rest of the poor people have to wait in line for hours. The fact that some of us even today proudly claim that only certain people can enter the sanctum santorum and “touch” the Lord.

You ask me what good is this going to do. I do not believe that social change and reform will happen in society by hiding everything under the carpet or by avoiding issues that may be uncomfortable to some. Keeping quite and worrying about what might happen was unacceptable to people like Buddha, Mahavir, Ramanuja and their followers. So why should it be any different for you an me thousands of years later?

Lead me from the unreal to the Real.
Lead me from darkness unto Light.
Lead me from death to Immortality.

- Ashtavakra Gita 1: 18-20

What’s this whole fuss about……if the Idol in Tirumala is Vishnu or Buddhist Idol. Is there a dire need for this topic ? Is there a deep sadistic pleasure that people derive by trying to untie the knot that has a history of more than 2000 years. In name of research and truth, one should not be blinded by such trivial matters and become numb to the obvious facts that surround him.

You seem to be a well learned person gathering from your replies and let this be where it is. You might say a hundred times, its a Buddhist Idol and I might say a million times, its a Vishnu Idol. So, where does this end ?

Tirumala is the most celebrated and most revered Shrine of Hindus, so please do not defile the sacredness of such an ancient Shrine in the name of bringing accurate facts infront of public.

This land has suffered enough by the repeated sacrilegious and barbaric acts of violence against its people and its religion in the past. So, let them be……….and do not hurt the sentiments of millions of people by writing such baseless facts based on some book written by K. Jamanadas, which was totally written with a firm single agenda to glorify Buddhism and defile Hinduism.

It might be easier for you to just present this in your blog in the name of freedom to speech and distribution of knowledge and then forget about it but hold on. Think about all the people with faith in Lord, you are just hurting their feelings.

If you are so passionate about Indian history, there are a million other things that you can write in your blog. But before doing this, there is a simple question you need to ask “what good is this going to do”. This is a very essential question that one has to pose to self in today’s volatile situation in our country. Educated people should help in reducing the gap in our society and not widen it.

I can go on and on, but guess, for wise just a pointer is enough….

The question you should be asking is whether shaving the head completely is part of the Vaishnava traditions and whether it is a sanctioned method of worshipping Vishnu. Shodas Upachar goes into elaborate detail on how Lord Vishnu should be worshipped and shaving ones head is not one of them. As I mentioned in one of my earlier comments shaving the head completely is one of the harshest punishments handed out to a Brahmin in ancient times (it meant excommunication from society). Many names for Vishnu and the avatars of Vishnu (like Ram and Krishna) are mentioned in the Vishnu Purana. But Vishnu as Venkateshwara is not mentioned.

The thread (Yagnopaveetam) that you describe is part of the Lord’s attire and not part of the original idol. Same holds true for the crown on the top of his head and the jewels. Did you miss the classic Buddhist Varada Mudra displayed by his hands? This Mudra is often displayed by Avalokitesvara who is a Bodhisattava. Avalokitesvara as you probably know plays a major role in Mahayana Buddhism. The idol also does not have any weapons. The tradition states that the weapons were placed on his hands by Ramanuja.

Your point about Archana is incorrect (I am not talking about the current TTD policy). Today the idols of the Lord are even carried to Dalit villages (Dalita Govindam) and the temple even has a program called Matsya Govindam to train lower caste people including fishermen on how to perform rituals. The temple also has a program called Bhakti Chaitanya Yatra where the idols are carried all over the state to spread the “Bhakti” aspect of Lord Venkateswara!

The first thing i want to reply about Head tonsuring. Shaving head is not only a part in Tirumala but also in Mecca where the Muslim brothers shave their heads. Even their are many Shiva temples in south india like Dharmastala, Nanjangud, Mahadeshwara hills etc where devotees feel satisfied to offer their hair. Why dont you claim Mecca & those shiva temples are originated from Buddhism.

next is about the idol being Lord Vishnu:
Seeing your article i feel you have missed reading about the character symbol of Lord Vishnu. Lord vishnu has a thread or Yagnopaveetam of 6 strands. one of it is cut. This is known as Somasutram. Once any idol is having this, by default its a Vishnu idol. none of the other gods have this representation.

next is lord has a crown which is of stone and is a single structure attached to the main idol. Will Buddhism & Jainism wear crowns ? Even the idol have many jewels carved on the idol. over and above, their is a hard engraved idol of Lakshmidevi seated on the chest of Lord.

Next about your point that anyone can perform Abhishekam or Archana:
For your kind information, only Vaishnavas can enter inside the Garbhagruha where the main idol is present. Then only 4 families of Vaikhanasa community (Vaishnava division) are allowed to touch the lord. no one else has touched the lord except them. Even other cannot offer tulsi leaves to lord’s feet. They have to handover the tulsi leaves to these Vaikhanasa archakas so that they can offer it to Lord.

Non violence is a human characteristic and I do not think it is the monopoly of any one religion. This article is about the origins of a very important Indian temple. These are two totally different issues.

You do not have to give a damn. So please move on and don’t waste my time.

I in fact like the timidity of the Hindu culture. I do not want India to be part of the “victors” group that you have in mind. All these so-called victors bite the dust eventually. Non-violence and renunciation are not the monopoly of the Buddhists or the Jains in India. Almost all religions in India have it. It is difficult to separate who got what from who.

victors will read about cows in history books

Being skeptical is also an integral part of being a Hindu. In the Rig Veda it says the following:

Who really knows, and who can swear,
How creation came, when or where!
Even gods came after creation’s day,
Who really knows, who can truly say
…When and how did creation start?
Did He do it? Or did He not?
Only He, up there, knows, maybe;
Or perhaps, not even He – Rig Veda (10.129 1 – 7)

It is time for you to stop your empty rhetoric and start learning!

Almost every caste name in India means something. Pandit can mean knowledge but it is also the name for upper caste Hindus of Kashmir.

Most of the caste names present in India today including my caste name is not mentioned in our scriptures. But this does not mean that these castes do not exist!

I am not sure what is the point about Kashmir being the hub of higher education. You can graduate from an engineering school in India and call yourself an engineer. Caste does not prevent you from attending engineering school. Nor does it mean that everyone who graduates does not have a caste!