.jpg)
.jpg)
Shiva Linga, (the phallus shaped Lord Shiva's manifestation), statues of Lord Ganesha (the Hindu elephant headed, pot bellied deity) and carvings linked to Hinduism have been found in Quanzhou, China.
So, is it at all possible that this could be a result of the fact that at around the same time Indian craftsmen and artisans were being taken to China to work on motifs and panels and these carvings were their creativity and not Chinese in origin? It was not usual during those times for Chinese workers to come across elephants as ha been depicted in this carving and this suggests imported ideas
So, is it at all possible that this could be a result of the fact that at around the same time Indian craftsmen and artisans were being taken to China to work on motifs and panels and these carvings were their creativity and not Chinese in origin? It was not usual during those times for Chinese workers to come across elephants as ha been depicted in this carving and this suggests imported ideas
Yes, some of these like this elephant (above) were indeed carved in connection to Tamils residing in China; in fact there was a colony of Tamils there. But, we also find that the Chinese Emperors were at one time practicing Hinduism like in today's Bali, Indonesia. Like the non-Indic Hindus of Bali there was an indigenous expression of Chinese Hinduism. The evidence suggests that though undeniably Tamil influenced, that elephant was Chinese made. Refer to the quote below.
Unlike the mainstream scholar's view of the Tamils residing in China, they did not act as an enclosed alien community. Thus, we see a Shiva temple whose 'donor' was a Tamil which was stated to have been built for the well being of the Chinese emperor and the Shiva deity was installed 'in accordance with the 'firman' (imperial authority) of Chekachai Khan' Genghis Khans descendant who ruled China at that time. in other words the Mongol ruler of China was intimately involved with Hinduism. In fact when we look closely at the evidence the Shiva temple connected to the Tamil appears to have been commissioned by the Imperial Chinese govt. And, as noted by Professor Guy, the Shiva Temple may have already been in existence, which is highly likely, and it is only the Deity of Lord Shiva that was new.
Tamil was not familiar in China at that time so the inscription in the Shiva temple had to be done by those for whom Tamil was not a native tongue thus it is quite possible and highly likely that the Deity was brought from India but the sculptures and temple itself were also crafted by Chinese.
Tamil was not familiar in China at that time so the inscription in the Shiva temple had to be done by those for whom Tamil was not a native tongue thus it is quite possible and highly likely that the Deity was brought from India but the sculptures and temple itself were also crafted by Chinese.
Almost 1000 yrs before this elephant was made we know Hinduism was widely practiced in China. We have this quote - "Yuag Xianji, member of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference, speaking at the C. P. Ramaswamy Aiyar Foundation, Madras on March 27, 1984 revealed that, “Recent discoveries of ruins of Hindu temples in Southeast China provided further evidence of Hinduism in China. Both Buddhism and Hinduism were patronized by the rulers. In the 6th century A.D. the Chinese royal family was Hindu for two generations. The following Tang dynasty (7th to the 9th century A.D.) also patronized both Hinduism and Buddhism because the latter was but a branch of Hinduism.”
(left) Citrakhanda-type pillars in the back hall of Tianhou Gong Temple at Quanzhou features Lord Nrisinghadev & Hiranyakashipu Quanzhou, China
A brief look into the Cham Vietnamese Hindu sculptures reveals a highly evolved Native expression of Hindu/Vedic art and sculpture. These same non-Indian Vietnamese Hindus are on record as having migrated in masse to China as well.
'There was no Great Wall of China ever built to keep Vedic culture out of China' nor any Ancient Mao that attempted to obliterate its presence in China. And all Vedic/Hindu art does not mean Indian art - in fact rarely do we find purely Indian art outside of India.
In the same way, the Ramayana is indigenous to all these cultures, and has never been proven to have been Indian-sourced but it is surely Vedic and thus Bharatiya. There was, as today, a synchronized flow of diverse cultures and expressions of Vedic culture and Indian people have very often had an integral role to play - there are clear indigenous forms of Vedic culture to be found everywhere on Earth.
Read Part 2 here: Indigenous Hinduism in China and the world (Part 2)
'There was no Great Wall of China ever built to keep Vedic culture out of China' nor any Ancient Mao that attempted to obliterate its presence in China. And all Vedic/Hindu art does not mean Indian art - in fact rarely do we find purely Indian art outside of India.
In the same way, the Ramayana is indigenous to all these cultures, and has never been proven to have been Indian-sourced but it is surely Vedic and thus Bharatiya. There was, as today, a synchronized flow of diverse cultures and expressions of Vedic culture and Indian people have very often had an integral role to play - there are clear indigenous forms of Vedic culture to be found everywhere on Earth.
Read Part 2 here: Indigenous Hinduism in China and the world (Part 2)
Don't forget to share with your friends and colleagues
You can leave your comments below, in the Comment Section. We like to have a healthy debate here. Please avoid profanity, personal attacks and rouse racial and religious sensitivity. The views of the commentators are not shared by Both Coin. The bottomline is, comment sensibly with relevance to the article.
