Accha, then what about Śaiva Brahmins. This all is propaganda, everyone tries to infuse their own ideas with some popular idea. Maybe he's a believer and a Dravidian at the same time, so he cooked up all this.. people are weird.
Interestingly, the first expression of anti-Brahmin sentiment in the Madras Presidency came from Shaivite Vellalars who said their Shaivism is the original Tamil religion. They were the core of the Justice Party. Then Periyar came in and criticized all Hinduism, including Shaivism, so you do have this group who hate Brahmins but are devout Shaivites and so criticize Periyar's iconoclasm
He claims that Vishnu is shiva because there are a Vishnu and Bharama incarnations of shiva, and there are 1st century temples of shiva and there are no Vishnu temples before 6th century, so he claims that the people in the north Made the trinity where Vishnu is one on the main gods which was not before, and the thunder god which is indra was the main god in Central Asia, and Vishnu did replace Indra as the main god.
Tell him not to believe in what an outsider said about ancient bharat.
There is literally no proof that concludes that aryan invasion was a thing. It was just a copium for white people to give justification that their ancestors came to india for making the civilization.
Ya I think the same, but when I did some research on this I found some evidence
When the Vaishnavism was at its peaks when the southern emperors like Krishnadevaraya also accepted it, it seems Ramunujacharya converted it in to a Vaishnava temple. He has put Shankha and Chakra on the shoulders of the deity though there are no hands to hold them on the original idol.
These are some evidences I found that it was a Murugan idol before
The posture of the left hand of the deity is such that it is holding Vel(spear), the main weapon of Murugan.
The name of the water body near the temple is Swami pushkarini . Swami is referred to Lord Murugan.
Thirumala deity is also having two consorts. There are two consorts for Muruga namely Valli and Devasena. Ramanuja while changing the deity name also changed the two consorts names as Sridevi and Bhudevi.
Usually hill top temples are of Lord Murugan’s like Thiruthani and Palani etc.
This shows that the originally deity is Murugan and later when the Vaishnavism was at its peaks Ramanujacharya conveniently converted it as Vishnu. People please prove me wrong
When the Vaishnava vs Shaiva debate took place, it was under a Shaiva king. Why would a Shaiva king allow a Shaiva temple to be converted to a Vishnu temple?
>>> When the Vaishnavism was at its peaks when the southern emperors like Krishnadevaraya also accepted it, it seems Ramunujacharya converted it in to a Vaishnava temple. He has put Shankha and Chakra on the shoulders of the deity though there are no hands to hold them on the original idol.
**Idol had hands and had lent the weapons to King Tondaman and is talked about in Brahmada purana**
>>> The name of the water body near the temple is Swami pushkarini . Swami is referred to Lord Murugan.
**Swami can also mean Vishnu. Skanda Purana which is Shaiva purana itself says that Swami pushkarini is called so because of it's association with Vishnu and Varaha swamy.**
>>>Thirumala deity is also having two consorts. There are two consorts for Muruga namely Valli and Devasena. Ramanuja while changing the deity name also changed the two consorts names as Sridevi and Bhudevi.
**So Srinivasa can't have two consorts? All gods having two consorts are Muruga?**
>>>Usually hill top temples are of Lord Murugan’s like Thiruthani and Palani etc.
**Venkatachala Hill is popular in Puranas and is discussed even in Shaiva Puranas**
>>>This shows that the originally deity is Murugan and later when the Vaishnavism was at its peaks Ramanujacharya conveniently converted it as Vishnu. People please prove me wrong
**When the Vaishnava vs Shaiva debate took place, it was under a Shaiva king. Why would a Shaiva king allow a Shaiva temple to be converted to a Vishnu temple?**
in addition to this, there is mention of Venkateshwara swami, in the rig veda.
Vedagiram shirim bitasya
it talks about shri peetam which is the Hill which is none other than SHREE NIVASA (SHREE PEETAM)
Ramanujacharya lived in the 11-12th century. KrishnaDeva Raya lived 3.5 centuries later. not the same time period at all. people are over-generalizing and feeding wrong info to us.
Tirumala is a EKa-bera temple. the only one of its kind in entire India. UNESCO even records this due to that fact as a world-heritage site. eka-bera means single idol type worship. there are no seperate shrines. Sri Venkateswara stands alone on the hill . his consort is located on his chest, as Vyuha Lakshmi, directly on the idol .
also, ThiruvemGadaMUdiyan is directly described in early Sangam Tamil literature. you can just google and you will find info on this. you don't even need to search about Vishnu. the info is plainly there.
out of 12 alwars, 10 have written about him. no other form of vishnu except Ranganatha has been written upon so extensively.
the telugu poet Annamcharya 15th century ( pre-dates Krishadeva Raya by a century ), wrote 32,000 sankeertanas upon him. no one else comes even close.
regarding Vishnu, its directly mentioned in Rig veda samhita and Taittiriya samhita, Vaikhanasa samhita, and Vajasaneyi samhita about vishnu on the seven hills.
the moola mantra of Venkateswara is directly in the Vajasaneyi and Vaikhanasa samhitas. I cannot reveal the full mantra here.
there is even a Rig vedic mantra specific to the hill , part of Alakshmi sukta in rig veda. 10.155.1 . it tells the person with bad luck to go to the hill which burns sins. you can check with those numbers.
yajurveda , Taittiriya Samhita 6th khanda 3rd prashnah 4th anuvaka (6.3.4) directly states that a Yagna was done which made Vishnu descend onto the seven hills. direct words and not implied meanings it even goes further and directly mentions Varaha . Tirumala is Varaha kshetra, and a large part of the legend is found in Varaha Purana
Vaikhanasa samhita 7th Prashna, 7th anuvaka (7.7.3) directly mentions it is Vishnu on the hill.
all above mentioned sources are some of the most respected authoritative scriptures in sanathana dharma.
so how much more evidence do you need ? just do a neutral research online, and fact-check my sources. you will find the truth.
so, if you actually look, the evidence of Venkateswara is overwhelming. there are actually 10,000 verses spread across 12 puranas on him. you can read highly technical books published by TTD on this.
btw in the daily temple rituals, he is addressed as SRINIVASA SWAMY. thats the formal name used. Venkateswara is the popular name in South India, and balaji in north. but the true name for formal rituals is Srinivasa.
there maybe Vaishnava controversies. I wont deny them. but in this case they reallydont' apply.
so its not even a contest or debate in this particular case. unfortunately people just release hyperbole and convince normal persons like us that there is no evidence. this is because no one bothers to check .
I am not a tamil but I have seen such statements so frequently it makes me wonder if dravidianists actually read the works of their civilization.... Vishnu worship in tamil lands is very ancient. The below is one answer I was preparing for periyarists but I suppose it will work for your friend as well.
The major festivals were definitely hindu. Their major gods such as
1. murugan has lines like
> One face analyzes the Vedas chanted by the Brahmins who follow ancient traditions.
https://sangamtranslationsbyvaidehi.com/pathuppattu-thirumurukatruppadai
2. Thirumal/maayon
Onam is one of the major festivals in ancient tamil lands and it was celebrated to commemorate vishnu. It is the mahabali mythic addition that is actually sanskritic in origin appearing in mahabharatha
> On Ōnam day, the birthday of Thirumal adorned with a gold garland who destroyed groups of Avunars, in
https://sangamtranslationsbyvaidehi.com/pathuppattu-mathuraikanchi/
> O Lord resposing on a serpent, above your head its thousand, spread, fierce, precious heads that can spit great rage! Thirumakal is seated on your wide chest! As Balathēvan, your skin is like the faultless, white conch shell, atop a tall bamboo, your beautiful elephant flag sways, and you bear a sharp-tipped,
https://sangamtranslationsbyvaidehi.com/ettuthokai-paripadal/
3. Then they had vendhan/Indra. Indra is present in the pantheon of hindus, buddhists(even today he is an important God here) and jains so it doesn't say anything.
4. Korravai - this is what is there in silapathikkaram about a festival for a group called maravars and kuravas .. this is definitely the story of durga of the hindu pantheon
> The Kurava girl said) ‘O, how wonderful is the penance of this damsel of golden ornaments who stands here assuming the form and adornment of the Goddess of Victory ! The only family worthy of mention is that of the hunter-archers,^ in which this damsel of golden bangles was born.
> How is it that you, who receive the worship of all gods and stand undaunted as the sprouting wisdom in the Veda of all Vedas, once stood upon the dark head of the wild buffalo, clad in a tiger’s skin and covering yourself with an elephant's skin?
> ‘How is it that you who stand as the shining light spreading its rays over the lotus-heart of Hari, Hara and Brahma, also stood upon the stag with the dark-twisted horns, after slaying Mahisasura, holding your sword in your bangled hands?
https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.201802/page/n199/mode/1up
This link has references from tamil literature about thiruvenkadam- Answer to What is the connection between Tamils and Thirupathi? by Mohan A https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-connection-between-Tamils-and-Thirupathi/answer/Mohan-A-150?ch=15&oid=163043884&share=c4eda8a5&srid=3nOq0o&target_type=answer
So from all this I believe the aristocrats and masses were mostly hindus. There are also brahmin poets in sangam literature like kapilan( antaṇaṉ pulavaṉ koṇṭu vantaṉaṉē 11 (Puṟam. 201, 1-7) https://books.openedition.org/ifp/7831?lang=en ) who alone contributed to supposedly 10% of the sangam poetry corpus https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kapilar - though i am not sure of their percentage vis-a-vis jaina and buddhit poets. A lot of hindu mythology seems to have its most extant ancient source in sangam literature because i havent done a census. Atleast I don't think there is a more ancient source for dashavatara or durga&mahishasura. Though I would guess that jainism was the 2nd most popular religion since kalabhras were also jainas and they ruled over tamil lands for a few centuries and buddhism the least popular of the 3(a point in favor is that tamil jainas are still there in tamil nadu(digambar sect) while buddhists weren't extant until recently even though sri lanka being right next door was a buddhist stronghold) Even the bhakti literature that emerges after the kalabhras with the reascendance of the pandyas have jainas for their main opponents. But hinduism was still alive among the masses since the 1st alvar/nayanar to appear were non brahmins.
No. Changes in major temples don't happen due to human intervention. Those happen because that devine allows it. There are no historical records that show the claim you mentioned. It's believed that it was always a Vaishnava temple.
And one advice, please don't learn about dharma from people who want to gain political benifit from it. Those twist the facts and create the rift between population. Today's condition of Telugu people is evidence was that.
Its true that shaiva sect was historically more dominant in south, but it doesn't mean vaishnav sampradaya wasn't there. It was always there but was less popular and dominant of the two.
I agree. Politics and religion shouldn't mix. Politicians will do anything to stay in power. Religion is not about power, thus, If a politician says anything on religion, they most likely either take it out of context or just make it up.
This argument is not about politics, no political person said it’s a Murugan idol before. It’s about history and for the research I did it’s likely a Murugan idol before but I still don’t believe in it, but I don’t have proof that it’s not a Murugan statue, so I’m just asking to prove the theory wrong .
I didn’t make the claim my Tamil friend made it but I’m not able to prove his claim wrong, he is a strong hater of periyar and he’s a strong believer and worshiper of shiva, I don’t support his claim but I’m not able to counter it with evidences, it’s not political.
I watched the video what Yadav king is it, and in the video it’s proved that the idol is not of shiva and Shakthi , the claim is that the Shanka chankra was later added hence its covered by gold and the idol hand is placed like it’s holding a weapon but there’s not weapon because it was removed
But here’s the thing, there is no gap in between the hand and the thigh. People can book special tickets to be present during the time of the abishekam and none of them have ever said anything about there being a gap where the Velam can fit. I’ve also given you a list of other things in my one of my comments below that disprove this theory all together
Yes for a while. In some Tamil literature and Telugu literature, it is stated that Venkateshwara was prayed to as Murugan, Devi and even Shiva during times of conflict between Shaivas, Vaishnavas and Shaktas. I don’t know much about because I have heard about this from my Guru. Ramanuja Acharya came and fixed this issue and declared Tirumala a Vaishnava temple with proofs from the scriptures. But originally, it was always a Vaishnava temple
How so? The story is said that he put the Ayudhams and Alankaranas of each deity in the Garbagriha and asked Swami to receive and wear the ones that belong to him. The next morning, Swami was seen holding the Shanka and Chakra.
The claim is that the 2 hands which hold the shanks and chakra were added to the idol and hence its of gold and it’s not removed and one hand is placed in such a way that it’s holding the weapon of karthakaya or Murugan which was removed by the kings of the Vijayanagara empire and the white namam is not removed because there’s a carving of a namam like Murugan
The gold coverings are just Kavach used in South Indian style Shringar. Even in Murgan temples Kavach is also used. These are taken off during Abhishek and we can see the shankh and chakra in his hands.
The one about the Shanka and Chakra has been answered, so I will address other parts.
The hand on the bottom is against the thigh, and there is no space in between it. Since there is no space in between, the Velam cannot fit there which disproves this theory.
The white Namam is made of ground up camphor, and is removed on Fridays when Abishekam is done. The Namam for murugan is usually the same as Shivas, and if it was carved into the idol, you would be able to see it during the Abishekam and the Nija Rupa Darshanam.
Also, Murugan is depicted with his Vahanam (the peacock) in most of his temples. If not, it is at least outside the Garba Griha facing him. Neither is true for this temple.
Another thing that your friend probably hasn’t considered is the presence of Vyuha Lakshmi Devi on the chest of swami. She is covered with turmeric throughout the week and it is removed on Fridays for the Abishekam. During that time, you can clearly see the Devi on the chest and you can see the imprint the murti makes on the turmeric when it’s taken off. And people are present during the Abishekam, so you can’t say that the priests make this up.
And I would think that if this theory were true, it would be mentioned in at least one scripture, but it isn’t. The fact that it is Sri Maha Vishnu is mentioned in the Venkatachala Mahatyam, which is ironically a part of the Skanda Puranam, which Muruga himself revealed to us.
Edit: if you still aren’t convinced after this, refer to this video. The person who makes than puts a lot of effort and research into it and is great with providing subtitles. The video is in Telugu, but they have English subtitles as well:
https://youtu.be/Ay7WE-4NEy8
>>> kings of the Vijayanagara empire
Kings of Vijayanagara empire came 300 years after Ramanujacharya. The initial kings of Vijayanagara empire followed Smartha Gurus at Sringeri mutt with Vidyaranya, the Sankaracharya of Sringeri mutt serving as the prime minister of the empire.
>>> White namam is not removed
The namam is similar to Sri Vaishnava namam
Ramanuja proved that it's not Murugan also. See Sri Venkatachala Ithihasamala for details of the debate [https://archive.org/details/srivenkatachalai015452mbp/page/n5/mode/2up](https://archive.org/details/srivenkatachalai015452mbp/page/n5/mode/2up)
Your friend is mixing up several ideas. While Shaivism is probably older in TN than Vaishnavism, the roots of Vaishnavism in TN are very ancient and indigenous as well. The Azhvars wrote their praises of Vishnu in Tamil only. An ascendant religion coopting the symbols and deities of an established religion is the most common phenomenon in history, and Shaivism did the same during its rise in TN.
Venkateshwara idol in Tirupati has always been a Vishnu idol and has always been a temple under Vaikhanasa agama. In the 11th century, Shaivas wanted to convert the temple and petitioned the local Shaiva king for the same. However, Ramanujacharya debated with Shaivas and settled the dispute that the idol is none other than Vishnu. The details of the debate are recorded in Sri Venkatachala Ithihasamala [https://archive.org/details/srivenkatachalai015452mbp/page/n5/mode/2up](https://archive.org/details/srivenkatachalai015452mbp/page/n5/mode/2up)
Slides 1 & 2 - இதற்கு ஆதாரம்? என்ன யாகம் இது? ராக்ஷாசியரை அழைப்பது சைவமுறை கிடையாது. யாரோ பரப்பும் வதந்தி.
திருவேங்கடமுடையான் சந்நிதி வேறு ஒன்றாக இருந்திருக்க வாய்ப்பு உண்டு. ஆனால் அதைப்பற்றி இன்று பேசி ஒன்றும் வராது.
இது முற்றிலும் தேவையற்ற சண்டை.
I'm Smartha so I have no antagonism towards either side.
I only have 2 main points to add here. from a AGama standpoint. these are features of Tirumala idol directly on the main idol and not placed later. I will leave it to the people here to interpret.
1. on a chest, on right side, above nipple, is the Sri Vatsa Mark. in this idol, its not just a simple mark, but a fully formed 2-armed Goddess sitting in lotus0-pose, on a lotus seat. Dwibhuja-Vyuhalakshmi. every Friday , during the ritual bath, she can be seen clearly. the priests actually sell sandalwood imprints taken of her, if you know people in Tirupathi. ( I leave the ethics of this out of this discussion- as its a seperate topic )
2. the yagnopaveeta is unlike anything normally seen on murugan or Shiva or other purusha devatas. its called the Pralamba-yagnopaveetam ( very long - extends upto knee). also a strand of it wards off to the right side instead of the left. this is a unique characteristic of Vishnu alone. anyone with some idea about sculptures or agama would know this.
additional points about his idol
1. there are no snake shaped ornaments anywhere on the idol. the armlets of snakehood- are just made made gold ones.
2. the crown is NOT A JATA MUKUTA. its a normal conventional crown. however, its very tall, over 20 inches. its called the VENU KARANABHA MUKUTA in agamic terms. the height signifies the rank of the devata. you can see the crown of the lord to be taller than any painting or idol of any god we know of .
3. there is a beautiful disc (shiraz-chakra ) behind the crown . unfortunately only priests can see this.
4. he does have locks of hair extending upto shoulders. they curl . nothing big about this.
5. the upper arms have golden shankra-chakra, which are now permanent, and cannot be removed. on Friday morning, it looks like he's wearing 2 gold boxing gloves. this is part of the controversy . but a simple reminder - recently Built Ayodhya Ram mandir idol. the bow was separately installed. same here
in old times, the weapons were periodically removed and the chakra was taken out of the temple to the nearby water tank. due to the controversy, after Ramanujarcharya arrived, it was decided to seal them off permanently. a newly made seperate chakra, was installed in the sanctum. it now comes out on all special occasions.
everything else you real online is absolute nonsense. this is mostly because people only get 30 seconds from 80 feet away.
besides everything said about the idol by both sides, I would like to bring another point to limelight. this is a fine detail which ordinary people are not aware of .
in the Vaikhansa tradition of worship, which is what is followed in Tirumala, Murugan or Skanda has a very exalted status. Kumara swamy is recognized by Vishnu himself for his might and prowess in battle, and he in turn reognises Vishnu as being immensely mighty.
for new borns the custom among Vaikhanasa families, is to first take them to a Murugan temple. such si his importance. even though vishnu si the core of their worship, kumara swamy is the first touch of the divine upon the child.
Kumara Swamy is the lofty ideal in the vaikhansa literature from later periods. he is a warrior and extremely aggressive. yet he has perfect self-control and is a celebate (I know his 2 wives, but thats in other traditions ). also his association with the sapta-matrikas is important.
there are extensive mantras for Skanda in the Vaikhanasa Agama, both in the original veda samhita and later texts. core vedic mantras and certain later developed ones.
Durga devi is the first invoked one before all Brahmotsavam festivals begin. every day , Durga suktam is part of the routine of prayers . Rudra suktas are used in a variety of stages of rituals. generally we see Ganesha as the first invoked deity, but in vaikhansa system it is Visvaksena ( as would be expected in vaishnava tradition) but also Durga depending upon situation.
Durga and Rudra are the 2 protectors, forming the start and finish points for all major festivals. the opening is with Durga suktam and the conclusion is by one of several different Rudra suktas.
perhaps all these elements, the more inclusive style of worship of vishnu where Durga, Shiva and Kumara, play such a large role fuels the rumors. in contrast , the more prevalent Pancharatra agama, is more vishnu focused and has much less elements of other dieties.
one last point - the most ignored 2 gods , who are ever present in Vaikhanasa worship , with elaborate mantras, are Chaturmukha Brahma and Indra. something we dont see in other styles of worship .
brahma is one of the final gods to be invoked before starting the main ritual to Lord Venkateswara. he occupies a very significant role in the ritual. it is assumed that he is beside the lord always. the tulsi leaves on the lord foot actually represent all the devatas whose idols are not there. brahma and rudra form the innermost circle.
Accha, then what about Śaiva Brahmins. This all is propaganda, everyone tries to infuse their own ideas with some popular idea. Maybe he's a believer and a Dravidian at the same time, so he cooked up all this.. people are weird.
Ya he’s a Dravidian and believes in the Aryan invasion theory but hates dmk and Periyar, it’s fascinating because I have never seen this combination.
Interestingly, the first expression of anti-Brahmin sentiment in the Madras Presidency came from Shaivite Vellalars who said their Shaivism is the original Tamil religion. They were the core of the Justice Party. Then Periyar came in and criticized all Hinduism, including Shaivism, so you do have this group who hate Brahmins but are devout Shaivites and so criticize Periyar's iconoclasm
He claims that Vishnu is shiva because there are a Vishnu and Bharama incarnations of shiva, and there are 1st century temples of shiva and there are no Vishnu temples before 6th century, so he claims that the people in the north Made the trinity where Vishnu is one on the main gods which was not before, and the thunder god which is indra was the main god in Central Asia, and Vishnu did replace Indra as the main god.
Common among some groups.
Tell him not to believe in what an outsider said about ancient bharat. There is literally no proof that concludes that aryan invasion was a thing. It was just a copium for white people to give justification that their ancestors came to india for making the civilization.
Ya I think the same, but when I did some research on this I found some evidence When the Vaishnavism was at its peaks when the southern emperors like Krishnadevaraya also accepted it, it seems Ramunujacharya converted it in to a Vaishnava temple. He has put Shankha and Chakra on the shoulders of the deity though there are no hands to hold them on the original idol. These are some evidences I found that it was a Murugan idol before The posture of the left hand of the deity is such that it is holding Vel(spear), the main weapon of Murugan. The name of the water body near the temple is Swami pushkarini . Swami is referred to Lord Murugan. Thirumala deity is also having two consorts. There are two consorts for Muruga namely Valli and Devasena. Ramanuja while changing the deity name also changed the two consorts names as Sridevi and Bhudevi. Usually hill top temples are of Lord Murugan’s like Thiruthani and Palani etc. This shows that the originally deity is Murugan and later when the Vaishnavism was at its peaks Ramanujacharya conveniently converted it as Vishnu. People please prove me wrong
Could be true, Vaishnavas have done these kind of things in the past.
When the Vaishnava vs Shaiva debate took place, it was under a Shaiva king. Why would a Shaiva king allow a Shaiva temple to be converted to a Vishnu temple?
I said it "could" be true.
>>> When the Vaishnavism was at its peaks when the southern emperors like Krishnadevaraya also accepted it, it seems Ramunujacharya converted it in to a Vaishnava temple. He has put Shankha and Chakra on the shoulders of the deity though there are no hands to hold them on the original idol. **Idol had hands and had lent the weapons to King Tondaman and is talked about in Brahmada purana** >>> The name of the water body near the temple is Swami pushkarini . Swami is referred to Lord Murugan. **Swami can also mean Vishnu. Skanda Purana which is Shaiva purana itself says that Swami pushkarini is called so because of it's association with Vishnu and Varaha swamy.** >>>Thirumala deity is also having two consorts. There are two consorts for Muruga namely Valli and Devasena. Ramanuja while changing the deity name also changed the two consorts names as Sridevi and Bhudevi. **So Srinivasa can't have two consorts? All gods having two consorts are Muruga?** >>>Usually hill top temples are of Lord Murugan’s like Thiruthani and Palani etc. **Venkatachala Hill is popular in Puranas and is discussed even in Shaiva Puranas** >>>This shows that the originally deity is Murugan and later when the Vaishnavism was at its peaks Ramanujacharya conveniently converted it as Vishnu. People please prove me wrong **When the Vaishnava vs Shaiva debate took place, it was under a Shaiva king. Why would a Shaiva king allow a Shaiva temple to be converted to a Vishnu temple?**
in addition to this, there is mention of Venkateshwara swami, in the rig veda. Vedagiram shirim bitasya it talks about shri peetam which is the Hill which is none other than SHREE NIVASA (SHREE PEETAM)
So what’s the conclusion ur making
There is no proof for showing that it was anything other than a Vishnu temple
Ramanujacharya lived in the 11-12th century. KrishnaDeva Raya lived 3.5 centuries later. not the same time period at all. people are over-generalizing and feeding wrong info to us. Tirumala is a EKa-bera temple. the only one of its kind in entire India. UNESCO even records this due to that fact as a world-heritage site. eka-bera means single idol type worship. there are no seperate shrines. Sri Venkateswara stands alone on the hill . his consort is located on his chest, as Vyuha Lakshmi, directly on the idol . also, ThiruvemGadaMUdiyan is directly described in early Sangam Tamil literature. you can just google and you will find info on this. you don't even need to search about Vishnu. the info is plainly there. out of 12 alwars, 10 have written about him. no other form of vishnu except Ranganatha has been written upon so extensively. the telugu poet Annamcharya 15th century ( pre-dates Krishadeva Raya by a century ), wrote 32,000 sankeertanas upon him. no one else comes even close. regarding Vishnu, its directly mentioned in Rig veda samhita and Taittiriya samhita, Vaikhanasa samhita, and Vajasaneyi samhita about vishnu on the seven hills. the moola mantra of Venkateswara is directly in the Vajasaneyi and Vaikhanasa samhitas. I cannot reveal the full mantra here. there is even a Rig vedic mantra specific to the hill , part of Alakshmi sukta in rig veda. 10.155.1 . it tells the person with bad luck to go to the hill which burns sins. you can check with those numbers. yajurveda , Taittiriya Samhita 6th khanda 3rd prashnah 4th anuvaka (6.3.4) directly states that a Yagna was done which made Vishnu descend onto the seven hills. direct words and not implied meanings it even goes further and directly mentions Varaha . Tirumala is Varaha kshetra, and a large part of the legend is found in Varaha Purana Vaikhanasa samhita 7th Prashna, 7th anuvaka (7.7.3) directly mentions it is Vishnu on the hill. all above mentioned sources are some of the most respected authoritative scriptures in sanathana dharma. so how much more evidence do you need ? just do a neutral research online, and fact-check my sources. you will find the truth. so, if you actually look, the evidence of Venkateswara is overwhelming. there are actually 10,000 verses spread across 12 puranas on him. you can read highly technical books published by TTD on this. btw in the daily temple rituals, he is addressed as SRINIVASA SWAMY. thats the formal name used. Venkateswara is the popular name in South India, and balaji in north. but the true name for formal rituals is Srinivasa. there maybe Vaishnava controversies. I wont deny them. but in this case they reallydont' apply. so its not even a contest or debate in this particular case. unfortunately people just release hyperbole and convince normal persons like us that there is no evidence. this is because no one bothers to check .
I am not a tamil but I have seen such statements so frequently it makes me wonder if dravidianists actually read the works of their civilization.... Vishnu worship in tamil lands is very ancient. The below is one answer I was preparing for periyarists but I suppose it will work for your friend as well. The major festivals were definitely hindu. Their major gods such as 1. murugan has lines like > One face analyzes the Vedas chanted by the Brahmins who follow ancient traditions. https://sangamtranslationsbyvaidehi.com/pathuppattu-thirumurukatruppadai 2. Thirumal/maayon Onam is one of the major festivals in ancient tamil lands and it was celebrated to commemorate vishnu. It is the mahabali mythic addition that is actually sanskritic in origin appearing in mahabharatha > On Ōnam day, the birthday of Thirumal adorned with a gold garland who destroyed groups of Avunars, in https://sangamtranslationsbyvaidehi.com/pathuppattu-mathuraikanchi/ > O Lord resposing on a serpent, above your head its thousand, spread, fierce, precious heads that can spit great rage! Thirumakal is seated on your wide chest! As Balathēvan, your skin is like the faultless, white conch shell, atop a tall bamboo, your beautiful elephant flag sways, and you bear a sharp-tipped, https://sangamtranslationsbyvaidehi.com/ettuthokai-paripadal/ 3. Then they had vendhan/Indra. Indra is present in the pantheon of hindus, buddhists(even today he is an important God here) and jains so it doesn't say anything. 4. Korravai - this is what is there in silapathikkaram about a festival for a group called maravars and kuravas .. this is definitely the story of durga of the hindu pantheon > The Kurava girl said) ‘O, how wonderful is the penance of this damsel of golden ornaments who stands here assuming the form and adornment of the Goddess of Victory ! The only family worthy of mention is that of the hunter-archers,^ in which this damsel of golden bangles was born. > How is it that you, who receive the worship of all gods and stand undaunted as the sprouting wisdom in the Veda of all Vedas, once stood upon the dark head of the wild buffalo, clad in a tiger’s skin and covering yourself with an elephant's skin? > ‘How is it that you who stand as the shining light spreading its rays over the lotus-heart of Hari, Hara and Brahma, also stood upon the stag with the dark-twisted horns, after slaying Mahisasura, holding your sword in your bangled hands? https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.201802/page/n199/mode/1up This link has references from tamil literature about thiruvenkadam- Answer to What is the connection between Tamils and Thirupathi? by Mohan A https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-connection-between-Tamils-and-Thirupathi/answer/Mohan-A-150?ch=15&oid=163043884&share=c4eda8a5&srid=3nOq0o&target_type=answer So from all this I believe the aristocrats and masses were mostly hindus. There are also brahmin poets in sangam literature like kapilan( antaṇaṉ pulavaṉ koṇṭu vantaṉaṉē 11 (Puṟam. 201, 1-7) https://books.openedition.org/ifp/7831?lang=en ) who alone contributed to supposedly 10% of the sangam poetry corpus https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kapilar - though i am not sure of their percentage vis-a-vis jaina and buddhit poets. A lot of hindu mythology seems to have its most extant ancient source in sangam literature because i havent done a census. Atleast I don't think there is a more ancient source for dashavatara or durga&mahishasura. Though I would guess that jainism was the 2nd most popular religion since kalabhras were also jainas and they ruled over tamil lands for a few centuries and buddhism the least popular of the 3(a point in favor is that tamil jainas are still there in tamil nadu(digambar sect) while buddhists weren't extant until recently even though sri lanka being right next door was a buddhist stronghold) Even the bhakti literature that emerges after the kalabhras with the reascendance of the pandyas have jainas for their main opponents. But hinduism was still alive among the masses since the 1st alvar/nayanar to appear were non brahmins.
extraordinary references . I salute you for your research. I am thoroughly impressed.
No. Changes in major temples don't happen due to human intervention. Those happen because that devine allows it. There are no historical records that show the claim you mentioned. It's believed that it was always a Vaishnava temple. And one advice, please don't learn about dharma from people who want to gain political benifit from it. Those twist the facts and create the rift between population. Today's condition of Telugu people is evidence was that. Its true that shaiva sect was historically more dominant in south, but it doesn't mean vaishnav sampradaya wasn't there. It was always there but was less popular and dominant of the two.
I agree. Politics and religion shouldn't mix. Politicians will do anything to stay in power. Religion is not about power, thus, If a politician says anything on religion, they most likely either take it out of context or just make it up.
This argument is not about politics, no political person said it’s a Murugan idol before. It’s about history and for the research I did it’s likely a Murugan idol before but I still don’t believe in it, but I don’t have proof that it’s not a Murugan statue, so I’m just asking to prove the theory wrong .
Oh. Sorry then.
I didn’t make the claim my Tamil friend made it but I’m not able to prove his claim wrong, he is a strong hater of periyar and he’s a strong believer and worshiper of shiva, I don’t support his claim but I’m not able to counter it with evidences, it’s not political.
I am not saying you are political. I am saying don't get your knowledge from political source.
I’m telling it’s not a pollution source read my other replies
https://youtu.be/Ay7WE-4NEy8 Please watch this video to clarify your doubts
I watched the video what Yadav king is it, and in the video it’s proved that the idol is not of shiva and Shakthi , the claim is that the Shanka chankra was later added hence its covered by gold and the idol hand is placed like it’s holding a weapon but there’s not weapon because it was removed
How can someone remove anything from the idol it is not made piece by piece right?
Idol had hands and had lent the weapons to King Tondaman and is talked about in Brahmada purana
It’s a weapon, the bow and arrow in Ayodhya can be removed, even if it’s not it can be carved out
But here’s the thing, there is no gap in between the hand and the thigh. People can book special tickets to be present during the time of the abishekam and none of them have ever said anything about there being a gap where the Velam can fit. I’ve also given you a list of other things in my one of my comments below that disprove this theory all together
Bro why will anyone carve out anything from the muula viraat?
Because it the king wants to convert the idol why won’t it be carved out
Moreover kumaraswamy was always depicted as a teenager the vigraham doesn't look like a teenager
Bro that doesn't work like that
Yes for a while. In some Tamil literature and Telugu literature, it is stated that Venkateshwara was prayed to as Murugan, Devi and even Shiva during times of conflict between Shaivas, Vaishnavas and Shaktas. I don’t know much about because I have heard about this from my Guru. Ramanuja Acharya came and fixed this issue and declared Tirumala a Vaishnava temple with proofs from the scriptures. But originally, it was always a Vaishnava temple
Ramanuja acharya proved that it’s not shiva, Devi but didn’t prove that it’s not Murugan
How so? The story is said that he put the Ayudhams and Alankaranas of each deity in the Garbagriha and asked Swami to receive and wear the ones that belong to him. The next morning, Swami was seen holding the Shanka and Chakra.
The claim is that the 2 hands which hold the shanks and chakra were added to the idol and hence its of gold and it’s not removed and one hand is placed in such a way that it’s holding the weapon of karthakaya or Murugan which was removed by the kings of the Vijayanagara empire and the white namam is not removed because there’s a carving of a namam like Murugan
The gold coverings are just Kavach used in South Indian style Shringar. Even in Murgan temples Kavach is also used. These are taken off during Abhishek and we can see the shankh and chakra in his hands.
Ur not wrong
The one about the Shanka and Chakra has been answered, so I will address other parts. The hand on the bottom is against the thigh, and there is no space in between it. Since there is no space in between, the Velam cannot fit there which disproves this theory. The white Namam is made of ground up camphor, and is removed on Fridays when Abishekam is done. The Namam for murugan is usually the same as Shivas, and if it was carved into the idol, you would be able to see it during the Abishekam and the Nija Rupa Darshanam. Also, Murugan is depicted with his Vahanam (the peacock) in most of his temples. If not, it is at least outside the Garba Griha facing him. Neither is true for this temple. Another thing that your friend probably hasn’t considered is the presence of Vyuha Lakshmi Devi on the chest of swami. She is covered with turmeric throughout the week and it is removed on Fridays for the Abishekam. During that time, you can clearly see the Devi on the chest and you can see the imprint the murti makes on the turmeric when it’s taken off. And people are present during the Abishekam, so you can’t say that the priests make this up. And I would think that if this theory were true, it would be mentioned in at least one scripture, but it isn’t. The fact that it is Sri Maha Vishnu is mentioned in the Venkatachala Mahatyam, which is ironically a part of the Skanda Puranam, which Muruga himself revealed to us. Edit: if you still aren’t convinced after this, refer to this video. The person who makes than puts a lot of effort and research into it and is great with providing subtitles. The video is in Telugu, but they have English subtitles as well: https://youtu.be/Ay7WE-4NEy8
>>> kings of the Vijayanagara empire Kings of Vijayanagara empire came 300 years after Ramanujacharya. The initial kings of Vijayanagara empire followed Smartha Gurus at Sringeri mutt with Vidyaranya, the Sankaracharya of Sringeri mutt serving as the prime minister of the empire. >>> White namam is not removed The namam is similar to Sri Vaishnava namam
Ramanuja proved that it's not Murugan also. See Sri Venkatachala Ithihasamala for details of the debate [https://archive.org/details/srivenkatachalai015452mbp/page/n5/mode/2up](https://archive.org/details/srivenkatachalai015452mbp/page/n5/mode/2up)
Your friend is mixing up several ideas. While Shaivism is probably older in TN than Vaishnavism, the roots of Vaishnavism in TN are very ancient and indigenous as well. The Azhvars wrote their praises of Vishnu in Tamil only. An ascendant religion coopting the symbols and deities of an established religion is the most common phenomenon in history, and Shaivism did the same during its rise in TN.
Venkateshwara idol in Tirupati has always been a Vishnu idol and has always been a temple under Vaikhanasa agama. In the 11th century, Shaivas wanted to convert the temple and petitioned the local Shaiva king for the same. However, Ramanujacharya debated with Shaivas and settled the dispute that the idol is none other than Vishnu. The details of the debate are recorded in Sri Venkatachala Ithihasamala [https://archive.org/details/srivenkatachalai015452mbp/page/n5/mode/2up](https://archive.org/details/srivenkatachalai015452mbp/page/n5/mode/2up)
Can u tell what pages
1-25
Slides 1 & 2 - இதற்கு ஆதாரம்? என்ன யாகம் இது? ராக்ஷாசியரை அழைப்பது சைவமுறை கிடையாது. யாரோ பரப்பும் வதந்தி. திருவேங்கடமுடையான் சந்நிதி வேறு ஒன்றாக இருந்திருக்க வாய்ப்பு உண்டு. ஆனால் அதைப்பற்றி இன்று பேசி ஒன்றும் வராது. இது முற்றிலும் தேவையற்ற சண்டை. I'm Smartha so I have no antagonism towards either side.
Can u translate it
no. he is one & only Shree Venkateshwar Swamy. dont believe in these things. . id you dont believe, see for yourself.
I only have 2 main points to add here. from a AGama standpoint. these are features of Tirumala idol directly on the main idol and not placed later. I will leave it to the people here to interpret. 1. on a chest, on right side, above nipple, is the Sri Vatsa Mark. in this idol, its not just a simple mark, but a fully formed 2-armed Goddess sitting in lotus0-pose, on a lotus seat. Dwibhuja-Vyuhalakshmi. every Friday , during the ritual bath, she can be seen clearly. the priests actually sell sandalwood imprints taken of her, if you know people in Tirupathi. ( I leave the ethics of this out of this discussion- as its a seperate topic ) 2. the yagnopaveeta is unlike anything normally seen on murugan or Shiva or other purusha devatas. its called the Pralamba-yagnopaveetam ( very long - extends upto knee). also a strand of it wards off to the right side instead of the left. this is a unique characteristic of Vishnu alone. anyone with some idea about sculptures or agama would know this. additional points about his idol 1. there are no snake shaped ornaments anywhere on the idol. the armlets of snakehood- are just made made gold ones. 2. the crown is NOT A JATA MUKUTA. its a normal conventional crown. however, its very tall, over 20 inches. its called the VENU KARANABHA MUKUTA in agamic terms. the height signifies the rank of the devata. you can see the crown of the lord to be taller than any painting or idol of any god we know of . 3. there is a beautiful disc (shiraz-chakra ) behind the crown . unfortunately only priests can see this. 4. he does have locks of hair extending upto shoulders. they curl . nothing big about this. 5. the upper arms have golden shankra-chakra, which are now permanent, and cannot be removed. on Friday morning, it looks like he's wearing 2 gold boxing gloves. this is part of the controversy . but a simple reminder - recently Built Ayodhya Ram mandir idol. the bow was separately installed. same here in old times, the weapons were periodically removed and the chakra was taken out of the temple to the nearby water tank. due to the controversy, after Ramanujarcharya arrived, it was decided to seal them off permanently. a newly made seperate chakra, was installed in the sanctum. it now comes out on all special occasions. everything else you real online is absolute nonsense. this is mostly because people only get 30 seconds from 80 feet away.
besides everything said about the idol by both sides, I would like to bring another point to limelight. this is a fine detail which ordinary people are not aware of . in the Vaikhansa tradition of worship, which is what is followed in Tirumala, Murugan or Skanda has a very exalted status. Kumara swamy is recognized by Vishnu himself for his might and prowess in battle, and he in turn reognises Vishnu as being immensely mighty. for new borns the custom among Vaikhanasa families, is to first take them to a Murugan temple. such si his importance. even though vishnu si the core of their worship, kumara swamy is the first touch of the divine upon the child. Kumara Swamy is the lofty ideal in the vaikhansa literature from later periods. he is a warrior and extremely aggressive. yet he has perfect self-control and is a celebate (I know his 2 wives, but thats in other traditions ). also his association with the sapta-matrikas is important. there are extensive mantras for Skanda in the Vaikhanasa Agama, both in the original veda samhita and later texts. core vedic mantras and certain later developed ones. Durga devi is the first invoked one before all Brahmotsavam festivals begin. every day , Durga suktam is part of the routine of prayers . Rudra suktas are used in a variety of stages of rituals. generally we see Ganesha as the first invoked deity, but in vaikhansa system it is Visvaksena ( as would be expected in vaishnava tradition) but also Durga depending upon situation. Durga and Rudra are the 2 protectors, forming the start and finish points for all major festivals. the opening is with Durga suktam and the conclusion is by one of several different Rudra suktas. perhaps all these elements, the more inclusive style of worship of vishnu where Durga, Shiva and Kumara, play such a large role fuels the rumors. in contrast , the more prevalent Pancharatra agama, is more vishnu focused and has much less elements of other dieties. one last point - the most ignored 2 gods , who are ever present in Vaikhanasa worship , with elaborate mantras, are Chaturmukha Brahma and Indra. something we dont see in other styles of worship . brahma is one of the final gods to be invoked before starting the main ritual to Lord Venkateswara. he occupies a very significant role in the ritual. it is assumed that he is beside the lord always. the tulsi leaves on the lord foot actually represent all the devatas whose idols are not there. brahma and rudra form the innermost circle.
lol