Shiva Linga in Kaaba controversy does not seem to leave me ever since I wrote on ‘Kaaba Shiva Temple, 786 is flipped OM, the sacred symbol of Hindus, Vedic practices in Islam, Siva Sthuthi by Prophet’s Uncle, History of Pre Islamic Arabia, Sapthapadhi practices in Arabia, Zam zam water Ganga Connection, Arabia was a part of Vikramaditya’s Kingdom, Mannat idol, which was reported to have survived (among some Idols) Prophet Muhammad’s Destruction of 360 Idols in Kaaba, was the main reason why Ghazni Muhammad’ s invasion of Somnaath temple Eighteen Times because he believed the idol of Mannat was in Somnath Temple.
Though I had written the articles quite sometime back, comments are still being received . Some of them in Facebook .Though some comments are very constructive, some are offensive and even abusive.This is not unique.It is not limited to these articles alone.Most of my articles, especially relating to presence of Sanatan Dharma in ancient world Cultures receive the same treatment. These articles are written with references to authentic sources/ links.Most of the comments express incredibility about the facts presented and call my articles being pro Hinduism and without any evidence.Those who post the comments do not bother to check the information provided in the article and related information/articles presented .
This approach is not limited to my articles alone.Any information that highlights the antiquity of Sanatan Dharma and it’s influence on other cultures:how Tamil culture has been a forerunner of many a cultures.
I recently came across an article in a reputed website which publishes articles purported to be researched and with authentic information .It is http://www.jstor.org. I have provided the link of this site towards the close of this article by way of link to the information I have provided in this article.
For my articles on Kaaba being a Shiva temple, in Pre Islamic Period,and my references about 300 Idols being destroyed by Prophet.i had also written that one of the idols that survived, Mannat was believed to have been spirited away to India , that it was housed in the Somnath Temple and that was the reason why Ghazni Muhammad invaded and looted Somnath Temple in Gujarat.
Instead of checking out facts, comments are being made that it is my fantasy.There was a mention that Kaaba was not Hindu temple but was A Pagan Temple. They should have checked what or which was the forerunner of Pagan Worship.
Varuna and Maitra are the sons of Aththi and Kasyapa. So also Surya,the SunGod. Worship of Surya is found throughout the world,with the attributes described in Hinduism. Mitra Varuna is worshiped in the Middle east, Italy and throughout Europe. And the Mayas,Incas,Mittanis,Akkadians,Sumerians and Egyptians were Sun worshippers.https://ramanisblog.in/2017/04/20/surya-sun-god-mitra-worshipped-ancient-rome-pope-baptised-with-varuna/
This attitude can be found everywhere where Hinduism is involved. In JSTOR site I came across information in an article found in book ‘ Outrage,The Rise of Religious Offence in contemporary South Asia’.The article was titled “Affective Digital Images: Shiva in the Kaaba and the Smartphone Revolution.”
From the title one would think that the article would be a researched article.
But what it does is to subtly inform the readers that the whole issue of Kaaba,Shiva temple is a figment of imagination by ‘Nationalists’ and that it has no basis. But it does it in such a way it can always deny it did not mean it! Without going in to the evidence, it sweeps them aside and takes the statement of Zakir Naik, the psudeo Hindu Scriptures Authority and an Islamic Preacher that Muhammad was mentioned in Vedas. Not only that, it draws Sri Sri Ravishankar of The Art of Living into the controversy by saying that he had written a book on Kaaba being A Shiva Temple without any evidence and that he had admitted it in a Television Debate with Zakir Naik.And Sri Sri Ravishankar had not published his book after first print.
I intend refuting all points raised in the article that cleverly evades the issue of Kaaba, Shiva Temple in Mecca and without checking evidence dismisses facts and in the process discredits Hinduism. I shall show that
- Zakir Naik’ s assertion that Muhammad is mentioned in Vedas is totally wrong and it has no basis.
- The Tamil and Sanatan Culture was present in Pre Islamic Arabia.
- Muhammad’s ancestors were custodians of a temple where Hindu idols were kept.
- Muhammad’s Uncle wrote A Siva Stuthi.
- That Pre Islamic Arabia had a rich culture.
- 786 is Flipped OM, The sacred Symbol of Hinduism
- How Sapthapadhi and other Hindu practices are followed by Islam
- There is little evidence of Prophet in the contemporary literature of His period save in Islamic texts.
Zakir Naik tried to distort Sri Sri Ravi Shankar’s message: Art Of Living foundation https://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-zakir-naik-tried-to-distort-sri-sri-ravi-shankar-s-message-art-of-living-foundation-2232560
Founder of the Art of Living movement, Sri Sri Ravi Shankar has been one of India’s highest-profile gurus since the early 1990s. In Hinduism and Islam: The Common Thread (2002), Sri Sri (as many of his followers fondly call him) drew heavily on Knapp to argue that, rather than fighting one another, India’s Hindus and Muslims must acknowl edge the many religious traits that unite them. Though Sri Sri was less explicit than Oak, Venugopalacharya and Knapp in asserting the Kaaba’s past as a Shiva temple, his attention to simile was nonetheless suggestive:
Though Islam prohibits idol worship, Muslims revere the black stone in Kaaba which is held sacred and holy. The black stone in the Kaaba is called Hajre Aswad from the Sanskrit word Sanghey Ashweta (non-white stone). The Shivalinga is also called Sanghey Ashweta… Another holy tradition at the Kaaba is that just as every Shiva temple has a sacred water spring that represents the holy river Ganga, there is a Zam Zam spring near the Kaaba (Shankar 2002, location 196-7 on Kindle).
Sri Sri Ravi Shankar was about to complete this book when the Godhra incident precipitated large-scale Hindu-Muslim riots in Gujarat in 2002. Believing his book manuscript to be of potential help in preventing further escalation, Sri Sri decided to speed up publication (Ved 2002) without double-checking his sources. For the same reason, he also made public appearances in which he made his conviction about the Kaaba’s Shaivite past more explicit. Some of the talks were videotaped and uploaded on the internet. This was not to the liking of his Muslim counterpart, the high-pro file televangelist Zakir Naik. In a public debate in Bangalore, televised for Naik’s Peace TV channel in 2006, Naik made Sri Sri Ravi Shankar admit his mistake of relying on flimsy sources. According to a transcript, this is what Sri Sri told Zakir Naik and his followers in front of the television cameras:
I know there are some mistakes in that book… [T]his Book was printed in an emergency, in urgency, when there was riots in Gujarat. I wanted this book to immediately go. I did not go to big scholars because I do not know much about Qur’an. I myself not a big scholar but the intention he caught behind that is to bring people together (Punj n.d.; grammar and synthax as in the transcription).
Though Naik refrained from initiating legal proceedings, Sri Sri Ravi Shankar resolved not to issue a second edition of the book, though Ama zon still provides electronic versions for Kindle.
print were now made available to a new generation. Some of Oak’s new readers were so enthralled by his arguments that they began to quote him extensively in online discussions that united Indian computer users with diaspora Indians across the world. However, the loop I am tracing is not yet complete. Equally important were the contributions of Stephen Knapp and Sri Sri Ravi Shankar.
From India to the US and back
Born in Massachusetts, Stephen Knapp read the Bhagavad Gita as a young man. He has spent most of his time since then spreading the gospels of Krishna consciousness and Vedic pre-eminence. Author of at least 28 books, his Proof of Vedic Culture’s Global Existence (2000) expands Oak’s overall argument. This is what he says about the Kaaba:
So, he [Prophet Mohammed] destroyed all 360 images in the Kaba and kept only Allah, along with the Shiva linga, which has become known as the Ashwet, or black stone (Knapp 2000, 34).
A few pages on, he is less assertive but nonetheless suggestive:
It is also said that the Black Stone (Sangay Aswad) is originally a representation of Shiva, Mahadeva, in the form of a Shiva lingam. Shiva is also known as Makkeshwar, to which the name Makka or Mecca refers. This linga stone was retained by Mohammed as a formless symbol of the Divinity, although its pedestal has been lost. … It is an ovoid shape, about 11 inches wide and 15 inches high. This is the typical shape and color similar to the black Shiva-lingas that are popular in India today (Knapp 2000, 147).
Though Knapp is less detailed than Oak and argues with less certainty, he acknowledges the inspiration from Oak in the preface. He also gives credit to a book titled World-Wide Hinduculture and Vaishnava Bhakti (1997) by one Dr S. Venugopalacharya. Though Knapp’s book is with out formal references and footnotes, it does have a bibliography titled ‘references’ at the end along with an index and a Sanskrit glossary. Com bined with its fluent and self-assured style of writing, this can easily make it pass as research to an academically untrained reader. One of them was Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, who contributed to popularise the nar rative about the alleged Shaivite past of the Kaaba, though he later was to regret this move. Citation. Frøystad, Kathinka. “Affective Digital Images: Shiva in the Kaaba and the Smartphone Revolution.” Outrage: The Rise of Religious Offence in Contemporary South Asia, edited by Kathinka Frøystad et al., UCL Press, London, 2019, pp. 123–148. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctvh1dx8q.12. Accessed 8 July 2021.