Why were temples built?

[prasad1]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Sadhguru: The very nature of human perception is such that, right now, whatever a human being is involved with, that will be the only truth for him in his experience. Right now, most people are involved with the five sense organs and that seems to be the only truth, nothing else. Sense organs can only perceive that which is physical and because your perception is limited to the five sense organs, everything that you know as life is only the physicality – your body, your mind, your emotion and your life energies are all physical. If you see the physical existence as a fabric, then we can say you are living on the fabric of the physical. You are walking on this cloth and what you are walking on is all that is real. When you look up, there seems to be a vast emptiness above, but even there you only recognize the physical. You look at the stars or the sun or the moon – this is all physical. You don’t perceive that what is not physical, isn’t it?

A temple is a hole through which you enter into a space “which is not.”
What you call a temple is like putting a hole in the fabric, creating a space where the physical becomes thin and something beyond becomes visible to you. This science of making the physical less manifest is the science of consecration, so that dimension beyond the physical becomes apparent or visible to you if you are willing. To take the analogy further, it is like the temple is a hole in the fabric of the physical, where you could fall through easily and go beyond.
Today temples may be built just like shopping complexes with concrete and steel, probably for the same purpose, because everything has become commerce. When I talk about temples, I am talking about the way ancient temples were created. In this country, in ancient times, temples were built only for Shiva, nobody else. It was only later that the other temples came up because people started focusing on immediate wellbeing. Using this science, they started creating various other forms, which they could use to benefit themselves in so many different ways in terms of health, wealth, and wellbeing. They created different types of energies and different kinds of deities. If you want money, you create one kind of form or if you are full of fear, you create another kind of form, which will assist with that. These temples came up in the last 1100 or 1200 years, but before that, there were no other temples in the country except Shiva temples.
The word ‘Shiva’ literally means ‘that which is not.’ So the temple was built for ‘that which is not.’ ‘That which is’ is physical manifestation; ‘that which is not’ is that which is beyond the physical. So a temple is a hole through which you enter into a space “which is not.”

http://isha.sadhguru.org/blog/yoga-meditation/science-of-temples/why-were-temples-built/

 

[renuka]

The word ‘Shiva’ literally means ‘that which is not.’ So the temple was built for ‘that which is not.’ ‘That which is’ is physical manifestation; ‘that which is not’ is that which is beyond the physical. So a temple is a hole through which you enter into a space “which is not.”

http://isha.sadhguru.org/blog/yoga-meditation/science-of-temples/why-were-temples-built/

I had no idea that the word Shiva literally means "That which is Not".

I wonder how to decipher that.


The letter Shi according to Vaman Apte Dictionary stands for auspiciousness and Va has many meanings...one of them is also auspiciousness besides meaning residence/dwelling and many more.

I really dont know how to arrive at a meaning of That Which Is Not?


One can only sort of guess that That Which is Not could refer to the Shiva Linga becos that The Linga represents beyond the physical.


Can some learned member help out here?

 

[Vaagmi]

When a boy meets a girl they speak sweet nothings.

when a devotee meets a baba they speak holy nothings.

So it is just nothing. No need to look for meanings.

 

[prasad1]

Renukaji, I do not have an answer for your question, then again you did not expect one from me. LOL

Harshananda, Swami. "Sivalinga". Principal Symbols of World Religions. Sri Ramakrishna Math Mylapore. pp. 6–8.

Shiva also means "one in whom the whole creation sleeps after dissolution".

In the Tamil language, Siva literally means "the supreme one." The renowned Hindu philosopher Adi Sankara interprets Shiva to mean either "The Pure One," (i.e., the One who is not affected by three Gunas of Prakrti, Sattva, Rajas and Tamas) or "the One who purifies everyone by the very utterance of His name." Swami Chinmayananda, in his translation of Vishnu Sahasranama further elaborates on that verse: Shiva means the One who is eternally pure, or the One who can never have any contamination of the imperfection of Rajas and Tamas.
http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Shiva

 

[renuka]

When a boy meets a girl they speak sweet nothings.

when a devotee meets a baba they speak holy nothings.

So it is just nothing. No need to look for meanings.

That means you have never really met a girl!LOL

Flirting needs no words..but a glance across the room between a male and female can speak volumes in the sound of silence.

Its not sweet nothings but its the language of everything.


When a child says Mam Mam....a mother knows he/she wants milk...you wont find the root word for Mam Mam in any
dictionary yet it has a meaning.

Everything has a meaning...at times more than one meaning.

Ajamila called out for his son...but Narayana answered the call.

Even NOTHING has a meaning...No Thing!

 

[renuka]

Renukaji, I do not have an answer for your question, then again you did not expect one from me. LOL

Harshananda, Swami. "Sivalinga". Principal Symbols of World Religions. Sri Ramakrishna Math Mylapore. pp. 6–8.

Shiva also means "one in whom the whole creation sleeps after dissolution".

In the Tamil language, Siva literally means "the supreme one." The renowned Hindu philosopher Adi Sankara interprets Shiva to mean either "The Pure One," (i.e., the One who is not affected by three Gunas of Prakrti, Sattva, Rajas and Tamas) or "the One who purifies everyone by the very utterance of His name." Swami Chinmayananda, in his translation of Vishnu Sahasranama further elaborates on that verse: Shiva means the One who is eternally pure, or the One who can never have any contamination of the imperfection of Rajas and Tamas.
http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Shiva

Dear Prasad ji,

Thank you for respond.

I am still unable to find anywhere the literal meaning of Shiva meaning "That Which Is Not".

Went tru Monier Willams dictionary...even that still says Shi means Auspicious and Va can also mean Auspicious/Abode etc.

Shiva is also denoted as "that in which all beings lie".

Many meanings to Shiva most probably based on the functions of the Shiva Principle more that the literal meaning.

From the Tantra point of view...Without Shakti Shiva is Shava(a corpse..powerless).

So I was just wondering that a corpse too is something that which is not...cos its a body with a form no doubt but it does not have the power of animation.

Another point of view is...Shiva means Auspicious....so without auspiciousness everything is a Shava(corpse)...again that which is not.


But I am yet to get to the meaning of That which is Not = Literal meaning of Shiva.

Need to keep searching.

 

[Vaagmi]

That means you have never really met a girl!LOL

Flirting needs no words..but a glance across the room between a male and female can speak volumes in the sound of silence.

Its not sweet nothings but its the language of everything.


When a child says Mam Mam....a mother knows he/she wants milk...you wont find the root word for Mam Mam in any
dictionary yet it has a meaning.

Everything has a meaning...at times more than one meaning.

Ajamila called out for his son...but Narayana answered the call.

Even NOTHING has a meaning...No Thing!

LOL.

I said sweet nothings and spiritual nothings. I did not stop with saying nothing. The adjectives make all the difference. You wasted your time and energy (my birdie sitting outside my bedroom window tells me that some one has calculated and found that 1.009867 calorie is burnt every time you punch a key in your computer key board). Oh what a waste of energy and Americans call this jumping the gun. LOL

 

[Raji Ram]

............ Shiva is also denoted as "that in which all beings lie". ...

Good point for you know who, Renu!

 

[sangom]

AFAI have read from different sources, the eastward migration of a group of people from the ancient Persia was caused because this (migrating) group was lenient towards worship of Devas or Gods by the instrument of totems or images, etc. But we find that Yajurveda, Adhyaya-32, Verses 1682 and 1683 clearly declare that :

न तस्य प्रतिमा अस्ति यस्य नाम महद् यशः ।
हिरण्यगर्भ इत्यॆष मा मा हिंसीदित्यॆष यस्मान् जात इत्यॆषः ॥
—meaning that the IT has no likeness (to anything) {and so no image can be feasible of that IT.} In the second line it is said that the IT bears the whole universe in its "garbha" and so IT's worship can be done only through mantras like हिरण्यगर्भ and anything else is likely to produce punishment (हिंसीद् denotes trouble).

These two verses are preceded immediately by the following in the Yajurveda:

तदेव अग्निः तद् आदित्यः तद् वायुः तद् तु चन्द्रमाः
तदेव शुक्रं तद् ब्रम्ह ताऽआपः सः प्रजापतिः ||


सर्वे निमेषा जज्ञिरे विद्युतः पुरुषादधि |
न एनं ऊर्ध्वं न तिर्य्यञ्चं न मध्ये परिजग्रभत् ||

Kathopanishad and Mahanarayanopanishad state :—

न संदृशे तिष्टति रूपमस्य न चक्षुषा पश्यति कश्च नैनम् ।
हृदा मनीषा मनसाऽभिक्ळुप्तॊ य एवं विदुरमृतास्ते भवन्ति ॥

There are clear declarations sprinkled all over the vast body of our scriptures that the IT or Ultimate God or reality cannot be worshipped through idolatry.

The vedic people who believed in the worship of Devas through yaagas made it a point to burn down even the shed (Yaagasaala) once the yaaga was complete and then perform the "avabhrita snaana" or dip in water for complete purification! This seems to have held good under the Poorva Meemaamsa period.

During and after the Upanishadic era, idolatry seems to have become highly popular, despite all the scriptural pronouncements against such a practice, although temples, Dhwajasthambhas and miscellaneous other constructions could have been installed right from the time of Alexander's invasion since that gave a good opportunity for our brahmins to understand their customs, beliefs etc. However, for reasons which are not clear the "temple" culture seems to have got a great fillip probably because of patronage by the kings and rulers, with the result that the hindu religion itself has become, today, temple-oriented. Bringing back people who changed over to Buddhism might have been one reason, I think.

Temples had been historically points of wealth accumulation and concentration. Today since there are ever so many temples, big and small, spread all over the country, there are BPL temples at one extreme whereas a few others wallow in wealth.

The details given in the OP by Sadhguru are hard to believe and personally, only the brain-washed followers of that sadhguru may be taken in by that theory! This is my personal view.

 

[auh]

Dear Prasad ji,

Thank you for respond.

I am still unable to find anywhere the literal meaning of Shiva meaning "That Which Is Not".

Went tru Monier Willams dictionary...even that still says Shi means Auspicious and Va can also mean Auspicious/Abode etc.

Shiva is also denoted as "that in which all beings lie".

Many meanings to Shiva most probably based on the functions of the Shiva Principle more that the literal meaning.

From the Tantra point of view...Without Shakti Shiva is Shava(a corpse..powerless).

So I was just wondering that a corpse too is something that which is not...cos its a body with a form no doubt but it does not have the power of animation.

Another point of view is...Shiva means Auspicious....so without auspiciousness everything is a Shava(corpse)...again that which is not.


But I am yet to get to the meaning of That which is Not = Literal meaning of Shiva.

Need to keep searching.

May very well refer to "para" and not "iha". Shiva or Brahman is something beyond. Much like Neti Neti. This is what I could infer.

 

[zebra16]

May very well refer to "para" and not "iha". Shiva or Brahman is something beyond. Much like Neti Neti. This is what I could infer.

To my limited understanding this "parA", "iha" classification as also "parA", "aparaA", "parAparA" classification, bifurcation of knowledge as "true knowledge" and "apparently true but not actually true knowledge" etc. is a later day retrofitting of scriptures after the vedic books were "closed" for composition so as to make the scriptures error free and also to make them of non-human origin.

There are quite a few vedic passages which call Indra et all to physically participate in yajna and bless the yajmAnan. Indra obviously came down to earth because there is no vedic record of Ahalya devi of living elsewhere than in Bhu-lOkam, as also no itihAsic record of Kunti devi meeting sUrya, vAyu, indra etc. other than on earth.

So what is"parA" and what is "iha"..?

 

[auh]

To my limited understanding this "parA", "iha" classification as also "parA", "aparaA", "parAparA" classification, bifurcation of knowledge as "true knowledge" and "apparently true but not actually true knowledge" etc. is a later day retrofitting of scriptures after the vedic books were "closed" for composition so as to make the scriptures error free and also to make them of non-human origin.

There are quite a few vedic passages which call Indra et all to physically participate in yajna and bless the yajmAnan. Indra obviously came down to earth because there is no vedic record of Ahalya devi of living elsewhere than in Bhu-lOkam, as also no itihAsic record of Kunti devi meeting sUrya, vAyu, indra etc. other than on earth.

So what is"parA" and what is "iha"..?

Might very well be, and I am only offering my thoughts on a possibility. Only when a word has multiple meanings and no one is certain of what it could really point to, can it be termed as mystic.

Indran was physically drawn to the yajna arranged by Janamejayan while Ravana was said to have conquered all the fourteen worlds. Obviously there are various criss crosses and I am not defending any of them.

Now, Iha is my place and para is yours... look beyond...

 

[prasad1]

Historians say Hindu Temples did not exist during the Vedic period (1500 - 500 BC). The remains of the earliest temple structure were discovered in Surkh Kotal, a place in Afghanistan by a French archeologist in 1951. It was not dedicated to a god but to the imperial cult of King Kanishka (127 - 151 AD). The ritual of idol worship which became popular at the end of the Vedic age may have given rise to the concept of temples as a place of worship.

The earliest temple structures were not made of stones or bricks, which came much later. In ancient times, public or community temples were possibly made of clay with thatched roofs made of straw or leaves. Cave-temples were prevalent in remote places and mountainous terrains.According to historian, Nirad C Chaudhuri, the earliest structures that indicate idol worship date back to the 4th or 5th century AD. There was a seminal development in temple architecture between the 6th and the 16th century.
This growth phase of Hindu temples charts its rise and fall alongside the fate of the various dynasties that reigned India during the period majorly contributing and influencing the building of temples, especially in South India. Hindus consider the building of temples an extremely pious act, bringing great religious merit. Hence kings and wealthy men were eager to sponsor the construction of temples, notes Swami Harshananda, and the various steps of building the shrines were performed as religious rites.
Today, Hindu temples across the globe form the cynosure of India's cultural tradition and spiritual succor. There are Hindu temples in all almost countries of the world, and contemporary India is bristled with beautiful temples, which hugely contribute to her cultural heritage. In 2005, arguably the largest temple complex was inaugurated in New Delhi on the banks of river Yamuna. The mammoth effort of 11,000 artisans and volunteers made the majestic grandeur of Akshardham temple a reality, an astounding feat which the proposed world's tallest Hindu temple of Mayapur in West Bengal is aiming accomplish.
http://hinduism.about.com/od/temples/a/historyoftemple.htm