Topic started by Mahavir (@ 61.11.18.38) on Thu Sep 12 13:46:12 .
All times in EST +10:30 for IST.

Tajmahal was a Hindu temple.... babari Masjid was a Ram temple..... and kaba was a shiv temple...

Well...., what about the hundreds of temples which today are known as Hindu temples but originally were Jain or Buddhist temples? For instance, the Tirupati Balaji temple or the Shringeri math itself?

Responses:

• From: Ashok (@ nat-33.laurelnetworks.com) on: Thu Sep 12 13:55:48
  
  tirupathi temple was a buddhist temple??? where did you get this info from. Can you give me the sourse for this? As far as I know its always been the same temple and nothing was destroyed there to build a tirupathi temple. same thing with shringeri math. Can you please give me more info on this?
  
  
• From: R (@ h66-59-174-253.gtconnect.net) on: Thu Sep 12 14:51:14
  
  Ashok,
  
  We have old thread which discusses these issues, if I find it I will post it. You might not know but amongst all Murukan Bhaktas of Tamil Nadu/Kerala there is this unshakable belief that it was a Murukan temple converted into a Vishnu temple and first time I went I was looking Vel hidden under the huge decorations of the murti. Anyway Puri Jaganath temple was supposedly a Buddhist temple which was converted into a Hindu Temple. That too was discussed here elaborately.
  
  But these Buddhists and Jains too did the same thing, when they come to power they convert earlier venerating structures into Jaina/Buddhist sites.
  
  I don’t know anything Shrigeri matha but I have read in credible Indian archaeology magazines about many jiana temples which were converted into Shiva temples during the Veerashaiva reformation in Karnatka which has nothing do with the Shrigeri matha and its followers.
  
  
• From: Ashok (@ nat-33.laurelnetworks.com) on: Thu Sep 12 15:02:34
  
  raveen,
  Were these earlier temples destroyed or modified? or were the gods now thought to be shiva or murukan or whatever else. I mean if the gods themselves were transformed into being a representative of another religion, then I think the the destruction of hindu temples by the islamic invaders and the converting of buddhist temple to hindu ones cannot be compared. I believe the same was true with the conversion of hindu temples to buddhist one too. they were nto destroyed. if I am wrong do correct me...
  
  
• From: Ashok (@ nat-33.laurelnetworks.com) on: Thu Sep 12 15:06:28
  
  the above comment, before I get a herd of posts against me, I meant in general. I am sure there were cases were the whole temples were destroyed. I am talking specifically tirupathi and shringeri math..
  
  
• From: :) Punnahai (@ d150-35-51.home.cgocable.net) on: Thu Sep 12 15:32:27
  
  Ashok:)
  
  Just for an analogy if I came to your house and chased you out but didn't destroy your house, wouldn't that still be wrong :)
  
  >>I mean if the gods themselves were transformed into being a representative of another religion<<
  
  How is it possible? Murugan for example looks very different from Venkatachalapathi or Buddha, so this conversion of the gods is not possible in my opinion. Do correct me if I am wrong.
  
  
• From: ashok (@ nat-33.laurelnetworks.com) on: Thu Sep 12 15:58:03
  
  punnahai,
  >>Just for an analogy if I came to your house and chased you out but didn't destroy your house, wouldn't that still be wrong :) <<
  
  the question is if it was forcefully changed or ifthe people converted? I am not saying that they were just that it is not a parallel comparison.
  
  
• From: Ashok (@ nat-33.laurelnetworks.com) on: Thu Sep 12 16:00:09
  
  >>How is it possible? Murugan for example looks very different from Venkatachalapathi or Buddha, so this conversion of the gods is not possible in my opinion. Do correct me if I am wrong.<<
  
  venkatachalapati is considerd to be vishnu, however there is no semblance of balaji with other gods, so the indians might have converted some of their local gods to buddha and then again reconverted them back to hinduism. again this is only a hypothesis, this is not a conclusion after extensive reading. thsi is pretty much a very uneducated guess.
  
  
• From: :) Punnahai (@ d150-35-51.home.cgocable.net) on: Thu Sep 12 16:00:30
  
  Ashok:
  
  ok :) agreed, you mean it could have been a remodeling as opposed to possession by force.
  
  
• From: Venkatesh (@ 202.8.136.2) on: Tue Oct 8 19:55:10
  
  Come on friends, lot about Thirupathi has been discussed. The fact that it IS a vaishnavite temple and that the lord is only Vishnu and not Muruga or Buddha, is proven is Silappadhikaram itself. Ilango adigal was a staunch buddhist. In his Silappadikaram he has written, 'mAyOm mEyak kADuRai vEnkatam'. In the Sanga thamizh literatures the word 'mAyOn' is used only for Vishnu. So from time immemorial, the god of Thirupathi is only Vishnu, whatever arguments one may put forth. There are lot of verses in Silappadhikaram which confirms that the lord is vishnu. I will post them shortly.
  
  A buddhist himself (Ilango Adigal) has said that He is Vishnu, so where is the question of He being a Buddha and what is the basis of calling Him Muruga. One's faith is okay, but no point in imposing it on others without substantial evidence.
  
  
• From: balaji (@ ) on: Sun Jun 6 08:19:59
  
  Venkatesh
  
  I think Ilango Adigal was a Jain. Please check. His guru Seethalai Sathanaar(who wrote Manimekalai) was a Buddhist
  
  
• From: saibaba (@ 203.101.32.248) on: Wed Jun 9 18:07:44 EDT 2004
  
  Okay so why vishnu is called Thirupathi? Why did you allow brahmins to change name of vishnu to Thirupathi....
  Has thirupathi ever existed??
  
  Most of Temples in Kerala, Tamilnadu (ancient) are originally jain temples which later made vishnu temples or avatar of vishnu. This is archaeologically proven fact.
  
  
• From: Saibaba (@ 203.101.32.248) on: Wed Jun 9 18:10:09 EDT 2004
  
  Thiruvalluvar too was jain.. proved by archaeology and historical facts.
  
  

Want to post a response?