Hindus unveil colossal statue

AlJazeera ^ | Jan 30, 2006 | staff

[liberallarry]

Malaysia's ethnic Hindus have unveiled what is being described as the world's tallest statue of the deity Lord Muruga outside a limestone cave shrine near the country's largest city.

An estimated 100,000 ethnic Indian Hindus watched as a helicopter showered flowers over the gold-painted, 42.7-metre statue late on Sunday at the foot of a hill outcrop that houses the Batu Caves, just outside Kuala Lumpur.

Samy Vellu, the works minister and Malaysia's highest-ranking ethnic Indian politician, conducted the official unveiling of the statue at the base of a 272-step stairway leading to the Sri Subamaniar Swamy Temple, located inside one of the hill's sprawling caverns.

Indian Hindus, who make up about 7% of Malaysia's 26 million people, regard Lord Muruga as a manifestation of valour, beauty, youthfulness, vitality, masculinity and happiness.

R Nadarajah, the temple chairman, said: "This is the tallest statue of a Hindu deity in Malaysia. 

"It's also the tallest Lord Muruga statue in the world. We are trying to get it reported in the Guinness Book of World Records."

Nadarajah said 15 sculptors from India and 15 other general workers took more than three years to build the statue at a cost of more than US$550,000.

"All in all, 1,550 cubic metres of concrete, 350 tonnes of steel bars and 300 litres of paint were used," he said.

The unveiling came two weeks before the annual Hindu festival of Thaipusam, when up to a million people visit the temple to pay homage to Lord Muruga and make penitence.

Devotees pierce the skin on their backs and chests with scores of hooks, or drive skewers through their cheeks and tongues before climbing to the temple.

Malaysia's majority, about 60% of the population, comprises ethnic Malay Muslims.

There is also a large ethnic Chinese minority who are mainly Buddhists and Christians

[frogjerk]

I mean what the word means. If someone holds a religious belief that you do not, you can still respect that person.

Absolutely, you are correct.

And you should expect to receive their respect for your belief, as well.

There are a huge number of Hindus on this planet. Many are very devout in their beliefs. There are a huge number of Christians on this planet. Many are very devout in their beliefs. One needn't share the beliefs of another to respect their belief and devotion to it.

You are confusing two different things. One is a respect for other persons, "Love thy neighbor". The other is respect for someone else's beliefs. Many other religions have truths in them and that I can respect. But, I cannot respect another religion's whole truth for their is only one Truth and it's name is Jesus Christ.

[MineralMan]

I'm talking about only one thing...respect for the beliefs of other persons. I'm not talking about the validity of any of the beliefs. I cannot, since I don't believe any of them are true. I respect all believers, however, as long as they are people show the same respect to others.

[AmishDude]

In recent history, it's been monotheism that has replaced polytheism. Knowing a few Hindu people, I wonder how long it will last as a faith instead of a few ancient cultural rituals. It seems as if it has a Greco-Roman feel of antiquity to it, at least to first and second generation immigrants.

[onedoug]

Monument to polytheism.

[Euro-American Scum]

An estimated 100,000 ethnic Indian Hindus watched as a helicopter showered flowers over the gold-painted, 42.7-metre statue late on Sunday at the foot of a hill outcrop that houses the Batu Caves, just outside Kuala Lumpur.

That's funny. I thought they'd be more likely to erect something like this in the lobby of Microsoft's corporate offices in Redmond, WA.

[MineralMan]

" Knowing a few Hindu people, I wonder how long it will last as a faith instead of a few ancient cultural rituals. It seems as if it has a Greco-Roman feel of antiquity to it, at least to first and second generation immigrants."

I suspect you're right, at least for those Hindus who now live in this country, where there is not a large Hindu population. However, I see no sign of decline in Hinduism where it is the dominant religion.

[brainstem223]

"All religions are equal, under our Constitution."

What a overreachingly false interpretation of the Constitution. The 1st amendment says: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;..." The Constitution makes no claims, statements, or assertions as to the "equality" of religions whatsoever.

[WorkingClassFilth]

"Christian monks and pilgrims used to whip themselves to "mortify the flesh." And that was just a few hundred years ago. No contradiction."

Technically, you could smear Christian theology with such loose and egregious examples, but I think you're probably made of better stuff than all of those fellow atheists that slaughtered 150 million people over the last few decades.

[CarrotAndStick]

" Knowing a few Hindu people, I wonder how long it will last as a faith instead of a few ancient cultural rituals. It seems as if it has a Greco-Roman feel of antiquity to it, at least to first and second generation immigrants."

The same is true of other major religions as well. A large number of churches in Europe are empty. Besides, atheism (as in questioning the existance of a superior power) is one of the means of attaining salvation.

http://www.indiblog.com/hindu/6/even-god-may-not-know/

Skepticism, Atheism and Agnosticism are integral parts of Hinduism - this is one of the biggest reason that Hinduism appeals to me. That it is not based on faith, but is founded on logic and reason.

It leaves me spellbound that the last line of a very famous hymn in the Rig Veda, popularly known as the Creation Hymn says that even the Purusha’s knowledge may be bound.

Is it not only reasonable that when we speculate about creation and weave the most plausible theory with one major assumption which is that Purusha exists, we should also give way to the argument that It may not exist - for, after all, it is only our assumption.

This is what an easy translation of the last few verses of the hymn states:

THEN was not non-existent nor existent: there was no realm of air, no sky beyond it.
What covered in, and where? and what gave shelter? Was water there, unfathomed depth of water?

Death was not then, nor was there aught immortal: no sign was there, the day’s and night’s divider.
That One Thing, breathless, breathed by its own nature: apart from it was nothing whatsoever.

Darkness there was: at first concealed in darkness this All was indiscriminated chaos.
All that existed then was void and form less: by the great power of Warmth was born that Unit.

Thereafter rose Desire in the beginning, Desire, the primal seed and germ of Spirit.
Sages who searched with their heart’s thought discovered the existent’s kinship in the non-existent.

Transversely was their severing line extended: what was above it then, and what below it?
There were begetters, there were mighty forces, free action here and energy up yonder

Who verily knows and who can here declare it, whence it was born and whence comes this creation?
The Gods are later than this world’s production. Who knows then whence it first came into being?

He, the first origin of this creation, whether he formed it all or did not form it,
Whose eye controls this world in highest heaven, he verily knows it, or perhaps he knows not.

Hymn CXXIX - translated by Griffith.

[MineralMan]

"What a overreachingly false interpretation of the Constitution. The 1st amendment says: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;..." The Constitution makes no claims, statements, or assertions as to the "equality" of religions whatsoever."

---

It makes no statements regarding religion at all except to say that people may freely exercise their religion. That's equality of religion. If you are free to practice whatever form of Christianity you adhere to and the Hindu is free to practice whatever form of Hinduism, then the two religions are equal under our Constitution.

[MineralMan]

"Technically, you could smear Christian theology with such loose and egregious examples"

Describing a practice of some Christians 500 years ago is not smearing Christian theology. That some Christians did such things is merely a comparison with similar things done by followers of other religions. It is not a value judgment of either.

I am not smearing Christianity. I am merely describing one aspect of it in history.

[WorkingClassFilth]

Please elucidate Christ's teachings on self mutilation for me.

[MineralMan]

I know that Hymn from the Rig Veda. It's very interesting, and seems to parallel both the Biblical creation story and science's Big Bang theory at the same time. Actually, I can see the Big Bang in the Genesis story, as well.

I suspect that many others see that same thing in Genesis. I find that interesting. Others see something else. Religion is endlessly fascinating.

[liberallarry]

But magnificent too. Take a look at these

[CarrotAndStick]

http://www.cs.rice.edu/~ssiyer/minstrels/poems/739.html


Here's an itrans version of the original Sanskrit (Rig Veda, Book 10, Hymn
129) from www.sacred-texts.com:

nAsadAsIn no sadAsIt tadAnIM nAsId rajo no vyomAparo yat
kimAvarIvaH kuha kasya sharmannambhaH kimAsId gahanaM gabhIram
na mRtyurAsIdamRtaM na tarhi na rAtryA ahna AsItpraketaH
AnIdavAtaM svadhayA tadekaM tasmAddhAnyan na paraH kiM canAsa

tama AsIt tamasA gULamagre.apraketaM salilaM sarvamAidam
tuchyenAbhvapihitaM yadAsIt tapasastanmahinAjAyataikam
kAmastadagre samavartatAdhi manaso retaH prathamaM yadAsIt
sato bandhumasati niravindan hRdi pratISyAkavayo manISA

tirashcIno vitato rashmireSAmadhaH svidAsI.a.a.at
retodhAAsan mahimAna Asan svadhA avastAt prayatiH parastAt
ko addhA veda ka iha pra vocat kuta AjAtA kuta iyaMvisRSTiH
arvAg devA asya visarjanenAthA ko veda yataAbabhUva
iyaM visRSTiryata AbabhUva yadi vA dadhe yadi vA na
yo asyAdhyakSaH parame vyoman so aN^ga veda yadi vA naveda


"The Song of Creation"

Then there was not non-existent nor existent:
there was no realm of air, no sky beyond it.
What covered in, and where? and what gave shelter?
was water there, unfathomed depth of water?

Death was not then, nor was there aught immortal:
no sign was there, the day's and night's divider.
That one thing, breathless, breathed by its own nature
apart from it was nothing whatsoever.

Darkness there was: at first concealed in darkness,
this All was undiscriminated chaos.
All that existed then was void and formless;
by the great power of warmth was born that unit.

Thereafter rose desire in the beginning,
Desire the primal seed and germ of spirit.
Sages who searched with their heart's thought
discovered the existent's kinship in the non-existent.

Transversely was their severing line extended:
what was above it then, and what below it?
There were begetters, there were mighty forces,
free action here and energy of yonder.

Who verily knows and who can here declare it,
whence it was born and whence comes this creation?
The gods are later than this world's production.
Who knows, then, whence it first came into being?

He, the first origin of this creation,
whether he formed it all or did not form it,
Whose eye controls this world in highest heaven,
he verily knows it, or perhaps he knows it not.

-- Anon. (The Rig Veda)

Translated by Max Mueller, in "Hindu Scriptures".

[CarrotAndStick]

Christ doesn't advocate self-mutilation.

But:

http://www.abcmalaysia.com/tour_malaysia/tpusam_pnance.htm

Hinduism advocates that the body should not be harmed as the body is akin to a temple that the soul resides in. Some devotees however, choose to believe that the only way to salvation is to endure a penance of pain and hardship. However, they are able to tolerate this ordeal of pain as they are in a trance-like state. There is no blood and they prepare themselves for this by undergoing specific rites during the preceding month.

BTW, this practice is banned in India, and the main article states it.

[WorkingClassFilth]

The wickedly Christian British did a fine job eliminating nasty little things like that. Cremating the wife alive when the old man croaked was another sweetness that'll probably be on the return soon.

[CarrotAndStick]

Sati was never practiced *all* Hindus. They were a minority. Mostly in the border states of India, which bore most of the brunt of the Muslim invasion. The wives of warriors burnt themselves to avoid being raped by the conquering invaders.

Besides, the British also stopped this:

[CarrotAndStick]

Oops:

...practiced BY *all* Hindus...

[CarrotAndStick]

...and this.