[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: ARTICLE : Shiva and Reuters
In article <504k09$b0q@news.ececs.uc.edu>,
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar@braincells.com> wrote:
[...]
>... a dictionary. The word linga means penis. Nothing false about it.
>The base of the Shivalinga is called a yoni which refers to the female
>reproductive organs.
[...]
>What prudery makes modern Hindus so uncomfortable about this topic? None
>of us would be here without a linga and a yoni you know.
Colonialism, some would argue. In fact, I know of a guy who wrote an
article on this exact topic, but it never made it to this group
because it was deemed sexually explicit.
Anyway, my guess is that colonialism brought in an inferiority complex
of sorts, and lots of religious things got changed in the process. I
read the Vivekananda explanation of the lingam, and also noted that it
doesn't explain the yoni.
I also read another post where it said that lingam means "symbol,"
which seems at odds with my understanding of the term. Finally, I note
that some people have made the claim on this newsgroup that Shaivism
was the original religion of India and that the others were imports.
I assume that claim is based on the Indus valley seals which depict
Pasupati (sp?). Some have claimed that he is the proto-Shiva, and if
that's the case, then the whole "modern" lingam explanation needs a
little tuning, since Pasupati was always shown with a prominent
erection.
-Vivek
