Dear Sangom Sir,
Re your post # 41 to K sir.
Sir, there is plenty of evidence to suggest the south was already populated before the vedic people arrived or merged into the local scenario.
I tried to find origins of Siddhas but not able to. It will be nice if someone can mention the earliest text describing or mentioning the Siddhas or their religion.
So far i found papers that Saiva Siddhanta cannon of interpreting Thevaram hymns, absorbed Siddha beliefs into its religion in the Chola period. Apparently, before that Siddha religion was already in existence (i sort of suspect Siddha religion was influenced by Jainism or maybe it was even a school of Jainism before it got copied / absorbed into Saiva Siddhanta)
Reg Gitabhasya of Shankara, i feel we need to take the history of Bhagavata religion into account.
It may seem plenty of prominent native Gods and their belief systems were absorbed into the brahmanical religion or mainstream Hinduism around the time of Mahabharat.
The earliest religious documents of Vaishnavas are Narayaniya section of Mahabharat, Pancharatra and Bhagavad Gita (Banerjee, 1973).
The Narayaniya declares there were seven Chitra Shikhandi rishis and they proclaimed the Pancharatra shastra as equal to the 4 vedas; and that it was meant for the general populace. Since it was to teach both Vritti and Nivritti it was made to conform to the Vedas.
Some authors say the very fact that Pancharatra was drawn up for the populace, and made consistent with Vedas, shows the system was non-vedic in origin. It seems Krishna-Vasudeva and Bhagavatism had a popular origin, and was later reconciled with the brahmanical religion. There are also direct statements from Mahabharat to show that both Pancharatra and Pasupata religion differed from or were different from the Vedas (Banerjee, 1973).
One of the earliest historical mentions of Bhagavatism is the Garuda Pillar at Besnagar (part of its details can be found here -
Vedic Discoveries: Krsna and Balarama in Greece ? Dionysus ? Herakles )
The Garuda Pillar inscription says it was erected by Heliodoros the son of Diya (Dion) in honour of the God of the Gods, Vasudeva. Heliodoros is described as a Bhagavta worshipper of Vasudeva, resident of Takshashila, who came as an envoy of Amtalikata (Antialkidas) to the court of Kasiputra Bhagabhadra.
Evidence from numismatics dates Amtalikata to 175 BC – 135 BC. So it seems during this period Bhagavata religion was already in existence, but perhaps not yet widely followed. Ray Chaudhri says the Vasudevakas were a local sect confined to the Yamuna valley and little known until their rise in later times.
Bhagavatism is postulated to have originated in Mathura. Its founder Vasudeva-Krishna was a scion of the Sattvata or Vrishni clan. The Vrishnis were not Brahmins, instead their origin was popular.
The Vasudevakas are not mentioned in jaina, or buddhist literature of the 3[SUP]rd[/SUP] century BC, so it may seem they came into contact with mainstream religion under the Sunga rule of Kasiputra Bhagabhadra.
Under the Sunga rule, the itihaasas were recast, and this led to incorporation of non-vedic religions into what Banerjee called ‘neo-brahmanism’ (or nouveau brahmanical cultures).
Perhaps Shankara did not give importance to the Gita, because the primary deity Vasudeva-Krishna, and the religion is quite heterodox, also in the sense that the religion infact goes against the vedic religion in some ways. I find no evidence it suggests resurgent aryanism and hence of casteism.
The Gita does not say a man’s occupation is to be fixed at birth and that too by violence (as endorsed by manusmirthi / dharmashastras). On the contrary, it may be possible the Gita was misinterpreted and interpolated by a section of smrithi-followers.
Regards.
