Got Milk?
21 August 2006 by Raindogzilla
“Hundreds of thousands of Indians thronged temples across India on Monday in the belief that statues of Hindu gods were drinking milk.
“I put a milk-filled spoon to Ganesha’s mouth and he drank it,” exclaimed Akhilesh Shukla, a trader in Lucknow, capital of northern Uttar Pradesh state.
He was among the countless devotees who carried milk in glasses and pitchers to northern Indian temples where Hindus worship Ganesha, the elephant-headed god of good fortune and wisdom; Shiva, the destroyer, and Durga, the goddess of strength.
“It is a miracle,” said Sudhir Mishra, a priest at a Shiva temple in Lucknow. He said that at least 10 liters of milk had been offered at his temple on Monday.
“Look at the floor it is fairly dry. Where’s the milk gone? It should be visible on floor. Can you see that.”
But others dismissed the milk-slurping gods as the work of less miraculous forces – surface tension, which pulls the liquid toward the statues, and capillary action, through which the milk is leached into the statues by tiny pores on the surface of the stone.
“Milk disappears the same way water reaches the top of a tree through roots,” said A. K. Sharma, a professor at Lucknow University.
Snip.
“The drinking gods craze came after thousands of Muslims flocked to a bay in Bombay late Friday and early Saturday to drink “sweet water” – ordinarily brackish water that was noticeably less salty than usual.
Scientists said recent heavy rains had lowered the salinity of the water, and officials urged people not to drink from Mahim Bay where the water is reportedly contaminated by raw sewage and industrial waste. Nearly two days later, on Sunday evening, milk was offered to a statue in the town of Bareilly, also in Uttar Pradesh, and the idol absorbed the liquid.”
Ahh, some good old fashioned hocus pocus one upmanship. Got sewage? Got milk?
“As the word spread through television reports, crowds swarmed temples in dozens of cities, just as millions did during a similar episode in 1995, when authorities were forced to deploy extra police to control crowds. Some parts of the country also faced a milk shortage.”
Did anyone remember to bring Ganesha some cookies to go with his snack? And they wonder why we think they’re crazy.
22 August 2006, on 1:29 am
Perhaps someone should piss on Ganesha and watch him drink that as well? I’m sure they didn’t know their gawd was into urolagnia too.
22 August 2006, on 1:48 am
So like I heard that Ganesh upon first seeing a human man naked in front of him. Looked him up and down and with a sarcastic slur said: Well isn’t that cute but can you pick up peanuts with that thing. And Indians ever since have worshipped Ganesh.
22 August 2006, on 4:53 am
“Milk disappears the same way water reaches the top of a tree through roots,” said A. K. Sharma, a professor at Lucknow University.
Kill the heathen! Kill him now!!!
What else floats?
Very tiny rocks!
22 August 2006, on 10:21 am
Whenever I hear “It’s a Miracle!”, I always smile because I can’t help thinking of The Life of Brian.
22 August 2006, on 10:30 am
It must be a lot more fun being a polytheist than a mono. I mean, think about it. You can have a soap opera of gawds, hating and warring with each other, maybe slumming it to mate with mere humans, and you can play them off one another. “Dear Kali, could I get that new car, Ganesha says it’s okay?” or “Kali, Ganesha said you weren’t powerful enough to give me a new car- pout, pout.” The Hindu gawds do seem nastier than most, making people bathe in the putrid and pestilent Ganges, making widows throw themselves on their husbands’ funeral pyres, releasing deadly chemicals in the air at Bhopal- oh, wait, that was Union Carbide, the gawd with the stars and stripes top hat and the funky beard. Never mind.
Now, if that tree in San Antonio starts spewing milk, I may just prostrate myself before my incense holder.
22 August 2006, on 10:39 am
I went with a group of people to visit a Hindu temple here in Houston. I even saw one man down on his knees, with his head touching the floor, and his arms stretched out in front on the floor, worshipping what appeared to me to be nothing more than an ornately dressed department-store mannequin. They “feed” and dress these mannequins daily. (Of course, they do “recover” the food, and don’t waste it, at least).
There was a painting of one of the gods, and you could walk around behind it. When I saw that it was just plywood, all I could think was, “So this is what’s behind the Wizard of Oz!”
Frankly, I don’t understand how grown people can believe this nonsense.
22 August 2006, on 10:59 am
What else floats?
Very tiny rocks!
Witches, ducks, wood, and churches.
Therefore, since witches float, they’re made out of wood, and since ducks also float, a witch must weigh as much as a duck.
22 August 2006, on 1:03 pm
There’s a very dedicated but still quite small atheist activist community in India trying very hard to “debunk” many of the traditionally held superstitions, especially those that endanger people’s health (and wallets). I don’t envy them, because they’ve *so* got their work cut out for them with these people…
22 August 2006, on 1:33 pm
While perhaps its not apparent at first glance, it is my understanding among the thousands of ashrams in India that house hundreds of thousands of people at any one time, there lives a rather sizeable number of people who would also claim to be atheist as well.
22 August 2006, on 1:37 pm
Witches, ducks, wood, and churches.
Therefore, since witches float, they’re made out of wood, and since ducks also float, a witch must weigh as much as a duck.
Dammit KR, you beat me to it!
…
A WIITTTTTCCCCHHHHHH!!!! BURN! BURN THE WITCH!
Hee hee. I feel better now…
22 August 2006, on 3:41 pm
I’m sure rodents have found the benefits of hanging out at these shrines. I understand monkeys are quite common roaming around the idols of India too. But, of course, no one should ever suggest that maybe these ravenous animals might lick up a spot or two of spilt milk.
22 August 2006, on 5:25 pm
Well, to be fair, Lynda, the rats *do* have their *own* temple – although I’m sure they wouldn’t be loth to converting others to their cause!
22 August 2006, on 6:15 pm
King Retard Da Rat Bastid
Why do witches Burn?
Cause their made of wood?
Very good
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CduBF7BmVbI
22 August 2006, on 11:52 pm
Yeah, Jimmer…as usual, comedy triumphs!
Wow, yesterday Carlin (again!); today Monty Python (again!)…no surprise…
“The Old Masters” never fail to bring us back from the brink!
23 August 2006, on 2:42 am
I heard the story that a number of Ganesh statues were never properly cleaned in the years after they discovered this effect. Apparently it left many of them quite smelly, but it is just a rumor I heard.
23 August 2006, on 11:41 am
Feeding the gods might not even be enough for this:
There was an article last year in BBC news about an Indian horror film in which the heroine sees ghosts after a corneal transplant. Eye doctors in India wanted the film banned because Hindus believe in reincarnation and might assume they would be born blind in another life if they were to donate corneas. Also, the doctors argued that the way the cornea transplant operation was depicted was inaccurate and misleading. The doctors reported that they had a huge backlog of patients, particularly children, waiting for the transplants.
Ain’t religion grand?
24 August 2006, on 3:27 pm
You know, I just read the original post again, and I can’t help but wonder if the hindus would be this happy if their statues of Kali, goddess of death and destruction, were to start absorbing blood; would this mean they would return to blood sacrifice for her, even human sacrifice?
19 September 2006, on 8:19 am
yeah being a scientist by trade and Hindu by upbringing, it would be nice if you guys knew what you were talking about before you started talking crap. A) Raindogzilla – Hinduism IS monotheistic, buy a book or try my friend Wikipedia B) ATM- if you could link any article citing the stench of spoiled milk years after, i would love to read it C) Lynda – not ALL temples in India are frequented by monkeys and rodents, just a few and that has nothing to do with north america where they would be quickly banned D) godsarefake – yes there is a sizeable atheistic population in India and E) MoeNeigh from the acts/thoughts of one Hindu, does not dictate a religion and it’s “general practices”
19 September 2006, on 10:54 am
Not a Not,
Hinduism is a complex kind of polytheism; I’m too tired to point you to the appropriate critical mythology texts.
21 September 2006, on 8:59 am
Marcus,
I don’t know of any mythological texts that claim hinduism to be a “complex kind of polytheism.” Please point me to them. At the heart of Hinduism is a monotheistic belief in that there is one supreme being, try reading the Upanishads or the Gita, search the web, maybe google this time. Another possible label is “pantheism” where the big G is identical with teh universe, but most definitely NOT polytheistic.
21 September 2006, on 11:20 am
Not A Not,
You’re reading the wrong mythology texts- read professional, critical work instead of relying on populism. I don’t need to “try to read” the Upanishads or the Gita because I already have- I’ve also read the Vedas, the Mahapuranas and Upapuranas, the Mahabharata and the Ramayana. Hinduism could be counted as both monotheistic and polytheistic, but is classified polytheism because it largely FUNCTIONS as one.
21 September 2006, on 2:43 pm
Marcus,
Dictionary.com claims
monotheistic
adj : believing that there is only one god [ant: polytheistic]
I didn’t realize that something could be classified as a definition AND it’s antonym. Isn’t that by definition, a contradiction? So it is one or the either, and it is most definitely NOT polytheistic.
Secondly, just because an object/religion has properties of a label does not make it part of that family. For example, just because a rock is hard does not make it a metal. Just because it may seem on whatever surface your ‘professional, critical work’ (which BTW you STILL have not cited) as “functioning polytheistically”, does not mean it is or should be labeled as polytheistic. It may have properties of polytheism, but again it is NOT polytheistic and thus SHOULD NOT be labeled as such.
21 September 2006, on 3:21 pm
Not a Not,
First- Of course it’s a contradiction; if you think mythology needs to be free of it, then you’re obviously not equipped for this argument.
Second- I don’t need to cite the appropriate critical works- you should already know them if you are on par with me. What kind of “scientist” (that was such a broad statement) are you ? Would you be opposed to an individual arguing against you in your own field while ignorant of its foundational concepts? Of course you would be.
Growing up Hindu does not make you an authority outside the content of your own religion or make you capable of arguing mythology/folklore concepts, sorry to say. Besides, “Hindu by upbringing” doesn’t mean anything- are you culturally immersed? Do you live in India? Did you grow up in India? Are you some white, New Age, Beatles loving, spiritualist type?
21 September 2006, on 6:15 pm
Marcus,
Unfortunately this discussion has dropped to personal insults. I have asked multiple times for you to cite any sort of proof to your claims and you have failed to produce them. Anyone writing a paper, defending a point of view etc. has to cite his/her sources to be taken seriously and obviously you are unable or unwilling and thus your point stays your opinion and holds no weight.
As for “mythology filled with contradictions,” that is fine, however blanket statements such as the ones you have been making are quite indicative of ignorance. If you have to pick A) Polytheistic or B) Monotheistic, B is more correct.
As for the scientist statement, I was merely trying to point out a way of thinking that is logical and methodical (again needing PROOF to support an argument). Being a Hindu by upbringing means I have personal experience with the religion and it’s practices along with access to other practicioners giving me the opportunity to examine how it is practiced and thought of around the rest of the world. My race, cultural background, and place of residency are of no importance because no matter what the answer, none of these define an expert on any subject. Does it make YOU an expert on this subject?
As for an individual arguing against me in my own field, I would point them to dependable publications as my proof, at that calmly, not like an angry child insultingly trying to “win”.
Exactly what is your “field”? Do you have a PhD in this? can you even read Sanskrit? If you are so knowledgeable in this subject, why are you so opposed to defend your point with proof?
In case it sounds like I am only shooting off opinion, here is some direct proof from texts (some that you claim to have read)
“The Truth is One, but different sages call it by different names.” Rg Veda 1.164.46
“There is only one God, not the second; not at all, not at all, not in the least bit.” – Brahman Sutra – a central book of Hindu philosophy
I will not drop to your level and insult you as you have tried to me. If you wish to back your claims with any sort of proof I am happy to discuss, however if you are not up to the challenge, I think I have made my point.
21 September 2006, on 8:57 pm
Not a Not,
Where, exactly, do you get the idea that I’m insulting you? I’m merely noting that, since you are a “scientist” you’re not really qualified to argue mythology/folklore.
“Being a Hindu by upbringing means I have personal experience with the religion and it’s practices along with access to other practicioners giving me the opportunity to examine how it is practiced and thought of around the rest of the world. My race, cultural background, and place of residency are of no importance because no matter what the answer, none of these define an expert on any subject.”
In an interesting way, you rhetorically contradicted yourself with these back to back statements; I thought I might weasel you into doing that. Really, I just wanted to know a little more about you so I could tease you a bit more- I would have had enormous fun if you turned out to be ABCD (you should know what that is, I think).
“If you are so knowledgeable in this subject, why are you so opposed to defend your point with proof?”
No matter what proof I provide, or if I reveal myself as an expert, your insistence that you have greater authority because of your “upbringing” would continue to be your perceived trump card. You see, since you noted your Hindu background, you were inherently telling us that no one here should be allowed to argue with you; however, you fail to consider that some here might be a long step ahead of you in proficiency with concepts concerning mythology/folklore. I would imagine you’d even argue if I told you I was Sai Baba (the real Sai Baba, not this Sathya ullu).
As far as your “textual evidence” goes, I might remind you that you’re approaching some sticky grounds when you argue mythology/folklore. A study of mythology is not consigned solely to the texts of a people’s culture, but also to their rites, their daily living, their combined history. Really, we’re both right, after a fashion, but you’ll never accept that because you’re “Hindu by upbringing” and will automatically think I’m some kind of firangi because of my disagreement. Evaluating mythology in this monochromatic, either/or “it contradicts!” sense would have made you a poor student of the field.
“I will not drop to your level and insult you as you have tried to me. If you wish to back your claims with any sort of proof I am happy to discuss, however if you are not up to the challenge, I think I have made my point.”
You haven’t seen me insult yet, but I can happily give you charity in that regard. And yes, I’m more than up to the challenge, but again I’ll let you do the research if you’re really curious- I expect you to have been well read in the field before you argue it. You haven’t made your point, but have been grandly entertaining.
21 September 2006, on 11:29 pm
well marcus i am glad you are entertained. it is unfortunate that you feel my statement of “upbringing as a hindu” makes you feel like i am closed minded and feel i have a trump card. Quite the opposite is true, in fact I have consistently asked you for these texts that I would me more than willing to read and analyze for myself. I never claimed myself as the foremost expert on the subject, I think you might have though. And what if I was Sai Baba, then what?
As for me apparently “rhetorically contradicting myself”, welcome to the club, El Presidente, here’s a direct contradiction…
Your first wrote:
“Hinduism is a complex kind of polytheism;”
that implies that it can ONLY be described as ‘a complex kind of polytheism’, which is contrary to
“Really, we’re both right, after a fashion,…”
which you just wrote. I thought you studied this as a student?
Regardless, my only mistake in my arguments with you are that you are approaching this as mythology where as i am viewing it as a religion. In that respect you somehow feel you have a upper hand and feel so high and mighty. I can agree with you that it fits neither description adequately, and that the “true” description is complicated; monoism, monotheism, henotheism, pantheism, none quite fits right? However, given all your variables, you could argue anything and everything about Hinduism. In fact, with enough BS of rites, daily living etc., you could probably argue atheism as a viable description. With that, your conclusion of “it is polytheistic” holds as much weight as “it is monotheistic.”
My original statement is still unhindered from your “analysis:” from a religious point of view, Hinduism has one God. Period.
And by the way, being a “scientist” with whatever stigma that may sting you with, does not mean I sit and read IEEE/Pubmed articles all day. Some of us do take the time to read and study outside of our professions/courses of study.
22 September 2006, on 11:09 am
Not a Not,
“I have consistently asked you for these texts that I would me more than willing to read and analyze for myself.”
What am I, an abstract index?
“I never claimed myself as the foremost expert on the subject, I think you might have though.”
Not the foremost, just more qualified than you.
“And what if I was Sai Baba, then what?”
Which Sai Baba?
“As for me apparently “rhetorically contradicting myself”, welcome to the club, El Presidente, here’s a direct contradiction… [blah blah blah]“
Like I wrote before:
“Of course it’s a contradiction; if you think mythology needs to be free of it, then you’re obviously not equipped for this argument.”
If you understood the study of mythology/folklore, as you said you do, then you would know that accepting the fact that mythic texts often contradict themselves as do the mythemes within them is perfectly fine. Unlike your science background which teaches you that contradiction is suspect, study of mythology openly embraces subject contradiction and keeps on rolling. You are examining this issue like a scientist- don’t.
“Regardless, my only mistake in my arguments with you are that you are approaching this as mythology where as i am viewing it as a religion.”
This is the second indicator of your ignorance in the subject- you are viewing the word “mythology” as if it is totally antonymous of “religion.” Labeling something a “mythology” does not indicate it is false or irreligious. If you knew something about the field, you would have avoided this layman’s mistake.
“However, given all your variables, you could argue anything and everything about Hinduism.”
Ahh… there you go, thinking like a “scientist” again. You’ll never be satisfied in this field.
“…from a religious point of view, Hinduism has one God. Period.”
From one point of view… sure… but then again, it’s a polytheism. Why are you so uncomfortable with contradiction? At Navratri, do you give Durga puja or Paramatman? You argue the importance of Paramatman like you’re a Judeo-Christian convert (being raised Hindu doesn’t mean you are any longer).
“And by the way, being a “scientist” with whatever stigma that may sting you with…”
You didn’t quite phrase that with proper denotative construction. Your “title” can’t be a stigma for me.
“Some of us do take the time to read and study outside of our professions/courses of study.”
You should know, from all the BS you probably get from amatuer “scientists” that hobby reading is a long stretch from academic competence.
I’ve made up my mind- you sound like the child of New Age religion American parents; that or an ABCD that’s been addled by xian hegemony.