11: VEGETARIANISM:
According to Anoop Chandola, “The Dravidians are conjectured to have added such aspects as yoga, puja (“honor” or “worship,” especially image worship), vegetarianism, and several deities including Shiva and Mother Goddess Uma.”42
Rajagopalachari points out that “it has always been the rule in India to permit any food legitimately obtained and consecrated as a sacrifice.”43
“The eating of beef, previously countenanced, is later absolutely prohibited. In the Mahabharata there are references to beef or veal being offered to honoured guests,”44 states Jawaharlal Nehru.
Sheldon Pollock points out that “Rama and Laksmana killed many animals…and ate them.”45
Swami Prabhupada notes that “animal killing in a sacrifice is recom-mended in the Vedic literature.”46
And Swami Dayananda wrote: “The Aryas should neither themselves kill such useful animals as cows, nor let others do the same (as cows give milk and calves) ….“Therefore, it is that the Aryas have always regarded the cow as the most useful animal.”47
Hinduism’s vegetarianism is economy than theology.
Krishna’s saying: “If one offers Me with love and devotion a leaf, a flower, fruit or water, I will accept it”–(Gita 9:26), does not mean that only vegetarian offerings are accepted. It is not the worth of the gift that is taken into consideration, but one’s motive, as defined by the words “with love and devotion.” Even simple inexpensive offerings are acceptable, as long as it is offered “with love and devotion.”
Krishna instructs the yogi to “lay kusa grass on the ground and then cover it with a deerskin”–(Gita 6:11-12).
The yogi cannot get “deerskin” if animal is not to be killed. The yogi would have to find a dead deer; and even a recent dead one. Though some may consider it an abomination to skin a dead animal.
(Without being cynical, the Hindu would have to go to the Muslim butcher to kill this deer to get him his deerskin. Though Hindus (not all) condemn the Muslim for killing animals and even kill Muslims for their religion and destroy Masjids; the most notable being the 500-year old Babri Masjid).
The Rgveda says of the Maruts, who are noted as “deified mortals,” that “Deerskins are on their shoulders.”48
It is strange “deified mortals” would garland themselves in “Deerskins” if killing animals were forbidden.
Describing an arrow “made of a piece of a deer’s horn and attached to the shaft with leather strings,” as Griffith explains, the Rgveda states: “Her tooth a deer, dressed in an eagle’s feather, bound with cow-hide, launched forth, She flieth onward.”49
Unless this deer was killed or dead it would be cruel to cut off its “horn.” Surely the cow would have to be killed (or be dead) to get its skin to make leather to “bound” the arrow. To buy leather would be condoning others killing cows.
The ideal situation could not be “vegetarianism” seeing that God had “respect” for Abel’s animal offering and “had not respect” for Cain’s “fruit” offering”–(Genesis 4:1-5); and when He gave instructions all over the place, from Genesis to Deutoronomy –from Noah to Moses– to utilize the meat of animals. Animals are allowed as food–(Genesis 9:3); as proof of innocence of murder, in which (they) “shall strike off the heifer’s neck there in the valley”–(Deuteronomy. 21:1-9); and as an offering to God–(Leviticus 1:2).
Condemning the eating of meat, which eating of meat is recommended by God, is unGodly. In fact when Noah, after the Flood, “offered burnt offerings” “of every clean beast, and of every clean fowl” “the Lord smelled a SWEET SAVOUR”–(Genesis 8:20-21).
12. CASTISM:
Hinduism has a four-tiered caste system. This caste system is rooted in the Veda and the Bhagavad-Gita.
The Rig Veda says:
“When they divided Purusa how many
portions did they make?
What do they call his mouth, his arms?
What do they call his thighs and feet?
The Brahman was his mouth,
of both his arms was the Rajanya made.
His thighs became the Vaisya,
from his feet the Sudra was produced.”
(X. XC. 11-12. Vol. 2, p. 559).50
According to the Bhagavad-Gita:” Brahmans, ksatriyas, vaisyas and sudras are distinguished by the qualities born of their own natures in accordance with the material modes”–(Bhagavad-Gita, As It Is, 18:41-44).
Whereas Brahmans and ksatriyas are considered the higher, women, vaisyas, and sudras are said to be of the lower castes or “lower births”: Krishna says:
“those who take shelter in Me, though they be
of lower birth –women, vaisyas [merchants]
and sudras [workers]–can attain
the supreme destination.”
(Bhagavad-Gita As It Is, 9:32).
Whereas a person can increase intellectually or regress regardless of the mental status of his/her parents, if these division of castes were one of merit and not of class, women could not be categorized as being of “lower birth,” as the Gita teaches.
V. M. Tarkunde states: “The theory of Karma, which says that our sufferings in the present life are the result of the sins committed by us in our previous lives, reconciled the poor to their miserable lot and consolidated the prevailing caste system and the barbaric custom of untouchability.” (Radical Humanism, pp. 10-11).
13. ORIGIN OF HINDUISM:
Swami Prabhupada wrote that Buddha is “the incarnation of Krsna.”51
But A. H. Vidyarthi notes that Buddha “discarded the doctrine of incarnation to which a man and an animal is believed to be as God,” and he “disbelieved in the unreasonable teachings of the Vedas as well as in their Divine Origin.”52
If Krishna is God, whether Krishna came as Buddha (or any other) he should not ‘discard’ his “doctrine of incarnation,” which is not only a fundamental doctrine, but he would be ‘discarding’ his own doctrine. He should not ‘disbelieve’ the “Divine Origin” of the Vedas, he would be disbelieving in himself; for as he says, that he is the “compiler of Vedanta” and the “knower of the Vedas.” (See the following text.)
Krishna says in the Gita, (9:17, 15:15 respectively): “I am also the Rg, the Sama and the Yajur Vedas.” “By all the Vedas, I am to be known. Indeed, I am the compiler of Vedanta, and I am the knower of the Vedas.”
And in his book The Way To True Worship, (p. 1), Anoop Chandola wrote: “The first recorded book of the Hindus is the Rig Veda. In it, “being” or sat is said to have its beginning in non-being or asat. More than a thousand years later, the Bhagavad Gita challenged this view, holding that there is no “non-being” state of being.”
If Krishna is the Rg Veda and “the knower of the Vedas” and the “compiler of Vedanta”, as he declared, he should not have “challenged” the teaching of the Rg Veda more than a thousand years later in the Bhagavad Gita. He is clearly challenging himself.
Regarding the teachings of Hinduism. Lin Yutang notes:
“The Sankhya philosophers believed that the world consists of two principles, souls and the material world, the Prakriti, or Nature, while the Vedanta philosophers believed in one all-comprising unity. Out of such debates in the forest grew these books.”
“…the final consummation of Vedic philosophy is to be found in Bhagavad-Gita, written perhaps two centuries later, when an ardent devotion to a personal God took the place of these barren speculations. According to Buddhist records, there were as many as sixty-three con-fusing schools of philosophy at the time of Buddha (563-483 B.C.), which explained Buddha’s revolt at their futile reasonings and ritualism.”53
Jawaharlal Nehru wrote:
“The early Vedic Aryans….paid little attention to the soul. In a vague way they believed in some kind of existence after death. Gradually the conception of God grows: there are the Olympian type of gods, and then monotheism, and later, rather mixed with it, the concept-ion of monism.”
That “foreign elements” brought their customs into India. And:
“Many of these customs were unlike those of the Aryans, and so a curious mixture of opposing ideas and customs is observable….Gradually the absorption of the earlier indigenous elements as well as of new-comers was taking place, and the Vedic religion was being modified accordingly. It was beginning to take that all inclusive form which led to modern Hinduism.”54
Britannica explains: “Hinduism has developed slowly from the synthesis of sacrificial cults brought into India by the Aryan invaders of about 1500 BC with the religions of the various indigenous peoples they conquered;” its “religious belief, custom, and practice has been influenced by Zoroastrianism, Christianity, Islam, the tribal religions of Central Asian nomads, and perhaps even Chinese Taoism.”55
Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din points out:
“India was the home of rank idolatry. But to-day, the worship of the stone is back number there. “The Brahmins and the Aryas, the two prominent off-shoots of Hinduism in India, hate idolatry and break images. Brahma’s creed, the earlier of the two, was started by Raja Ram Mohan Rai, who received his monotheistic inspirations from the Qur-’an, as he admits himself in his writings. Arya Samaj did the same. Even the staunch advocates of stone-worship now seek apologies for it. They take pains to make it quite plain that “they are not polytheists in reality.” They worship One God, but to concentrate their mind on the Great Unseen and Unknown they need something perceivable; hence the image (Why not concentrate on the written name of God instead; or best yet come to Islam). What influence else than Islam can claim the credit for this wonderful change in Hindu theology? There was nothing in the Vedas –the Hindu Bible– a Book of Element-worship, as it at present stands –to inspire faith in One God. Traditional Christianity –the so-called historic– herself benighted in such matters, could not guide others to these lofty ideas. To-day, the worship of more than one god is on the wane and Muslim monotheism hailed everywhere.”56
The Qur’an contains teachings of past Scriptures that are applicable for all time–(Qur’an 98:2-3). and has teachings not met with in previous Revelations. Thus, the Qur’an consists of, exceeds, and supersedes all Scriptures.
How aptly and succinctly then Allāh God calls us to reason: What reason have you that you believe not in Allah?–(Qur’an 77:50; 57:8).
Hinduism is complexity, mythology and uncertainty.
Islam is simplicity, Divinity and certainty:
“Surely the owners of the Garden are on that day in a happy occupation. They and their wives are in shades, reclining on raised couches”–(Qur’an 36:56)
“Enter the garden, you and your wives being made happy”–(Qur’an 43:70;
“And those who believe and whose off-spring follow them in faith –We unite them with their offspring and We shall deprive them of naught of their work. Every man is pledged for his work”–Qur’an 52:21)
“And whoever does good deeds, whether male or FEMALE, and he (or she) is a believer –these will enter the Garden, and they will NOT be dealt with a whit unjustly”–Qur’an 4:124)
“Surely the men who submit and the women who submit, and the believing men and the believing women, and the obeying men and the obeying women, and the truthful men and the truthful women, and the patient men and the patient women, and the humble men and the humble women, and the alms-giving men and the alms-giving women, and the fasting men and the fasting women, and the men who guard their private parts and the women who guard, and the men who remember Allah much and the women who remember* –Allah has prepared for THEM FORGIVENESS AND A MIGHTY REWARD”–(Qur’an 33:35).
“Surely for those who keep their duty is achievement, Gardens and vineyards, And youthful (companions), equals in age, And a pure cup. They hear not therein vain words, nor lying — A reward from thy Lord, a gift sufficient”–(Qur’an 78:31-36).
Any wonder then that even in the face of our adversity and suffering Muslims still laugh and smile: “And you hope from Allāh what they hope not”–(Qur’an 4:104).
Māshā-Allāh! Alhamdo-lillāh!
14. YOGA UNGODLY
In the Bhagavad-Gita, Krishna says (quoting the relevant portions of the verses): “one can never become a yogi unless he renounces the desire for sense gratification,” “he should live alone in a secluded place” and with “subdued mind, devoid of fear, completely free from sex life, one should meditate upon Me,” for “A yogi is greater than the ascetic, greater than the empiricist, and greater than the fruitive worker. Therefore, O Arjuna, in all circumstances, be a yogi”–(6:2, 10, 14, 46).57
Clearly, if every man should begin practising this yoga, in about 130 years time, barring cloning and other methods of non-sexual production, mankind would be extinct.
To ensure the propagation of the species God instils pleasure in the act, but “yoga” is advocating that we deny/renounce this God-given joy. Sex/joy in the bed of marriage is not “lust.”
“Lust” “anger” and “greed” are not necessarily the “three gates of hell.” A person can harbour these emotions without acting on them.
One can be angry (even God is said to be angry at times) without harming another. One can be greedy but not hoarding; and not acquiring through illegal methods; and may even give in charity (benefitting others rather than sit secluded oblivious to the poor suffering/dying from need).
In the Bible God enjoined on Adam and Eve to fill the earth: “And God BLESSED them, and God said unto them, Be FRUITFUL, and MULTIPLY, and REPLENISH the earth” –Genesis 1:28).
There are many instances of marriage in the Bible, such as Abraham having a wife, Sarah–(Genesis 17:15) and finding a wife for his son, Isaac–(Genesis 24). Moses was married. And Solomon, the Wise, had seven hundred wives and three hundred concubines–(1 Kings 11:3).
Marriage is so sacred that Jesus allowed severing the marriage-tie only in the case of fornication/adultery–(Mark 10:11-12. Even Jesus-had a wife)
In His Qur’an Allāh God states:
“And of His signs is this, that He created MATES FOR YOU from yourselves that you might find quiet of mind in them, and He put between you love and compassion”–(Qur’an 30:21);
“And marry those among you who are single, and those who are fit among your male slaves and your female slaves. If they are needy, Allah will make them free from want out of His grace. And Allah is Ample-giving, Knowing”–(Qur’an 24:32).
Prophet Mohammad says: “When a man marries he has fulfilled half of the Deen (religion); so let him fear Allah regarding the remaining half (of his religion)”–(Al-Tirmidhi, Hadith 3096).58
It is well-known that Prophet Mohammad had, depending on who you read, from nine to thirty wives.
The Vedas also enjoin marriage and raising children:
“Oh man and woman, having acquired knowledge from the learned, proclaim amongst the wise the fact of your intention of entering the MARRIED LIFE. Attain to fame, observing the noble virtue of non-violence, and uplift your soul. Converse together happily, living in a peaceful home, spoil not you life”–(Yajur Veda 5.17, 44).
“May happiness await you with your CHILDREN! Watch o’er this house as mistress of the home. Unite yourself wholly with your husband. Thus authority in speech till old age will be yours”–(Rig Veda X, 85, 27).59
The Bhagavad Gita, which is a conversation between Krishna and Arjuna, also alludes to marriage and having children.
Krishna is said to have had eight main wives and many junior wives, numbering “16,000 or 16,100 in different scriptures.” Out of these 16,000 wives “every wife had 10 children,” and he had in total “1,61,080 Children.” 60 Krishna even had Radha, another man’s wife, as consort.
Without doubt, to oppose the law/ordinance of God is to be against God; and to be, or to counsel, against God is unGodly.
In renouncing the world one is rejecting that which God made lawful. We need to balance our living; not suffer the material for the spiritual or suffer the spiritual for the material.
Since the Bible, Qur’an, Veda and Gita enjoin marriage, then evidently celibacy diametrically opposes the law of God to “Be FRUITFUL, and MULTIPLY, and REPLENISH the earth”–(Genesis 1:28).
Therefore yoga, which counsels that man “should live alone in a secluded place,” “completely free from sex life” and meditate only on Krishna is UNGODLY.
However, this yoga teaching of Krishna is NOT a Divine requirement. The Bhagavad Gita is mythology. And Swami Dayananda Saraswati wrote: (The Bhagavad Gita) “Being opposed to the Veda, it cannot be held to be an authority.…Krishna could never be God.” 61
And in his book The Way To True Worship, (p. 1), Anoop Chandola wrote:
“The first recorded book of the Hindus is the Rig Veda. In it, “being” or sat is said to have its beginning in non-being or asat. More than a thousand years later, the Bhagavad Gita challenged this view, holding that there is no “non-being” state of being.”
(If Krishna is the Rg Veda and “the knower of the Vedas” and the “compiler of Vedanta”, as he declared, he should not have “challenged” the teaching of the Rg Veda more than a thousand years later in the Bhagavad Gita. He is clearly challenging himself. GOD CHALLENGING HIMSELF?).
Anoop Chandola also explains in the same book noted above (P. 9):
“The Vedas included several major gods and goddesses some of whom must have been culture heroes….As the tradition of honoring culture heroes continued, in due course new heroes were added, two of them most important: Rama and Krishna”–(Emphasis/color added).
Thus, not only is Krishna not God to make such a “yoga” pronouncement but this yoga is opposed to the Divine ordinance of procreation.
While there is merit in exercise and mediation (refining one’s self into oneness with God), yoga as the way to God has no Divine foundation.
Clearly YOGA IS UNGODLY.
15. OM/AUM DOES NOT EXIST
The word “OM/AUM” which Hindus chant/utter in their meditation (and which Hindus consider to refer to God) is NOT mentioned in the Rg Veda.
Regarding the Gayatri mantra of the RgVeda which reads:
“Tat Savitur Varenyam Bhargo
Devasya Dhi Mahi
Dhiyo Yo Nah Prachodyat”
(“That Sun, bright and pure,
the god’s great wisdom
–may he sharpen and refine our intellect”)
Abdul Haque Vidyarthi points out in his book Muhammad in World Scriptures that to give meaning to this Gayatri mantra, “the pandits prefix these four words which DOES NOT EXIST in the Veda Om bhur bhava svaha. The word Om, it may be noted, is NOT FOUND ANYWHERE in the Rig Veda. These four words they interpolate and insert before the Gayatri mantra for the reason that it may yield some significance at least.” (Emphasis added, .For more on this see Mohammad-and Moulood).
Another source points out: “Om is not mentioned in the ancient Rig-Veda. The only possible indirect reference is in hymns 1.164.39 which speaks of the syllable (akshara) that exists.”— Presentation transcript” (For more see
https://slideplayer.com/slide/7634863/. IF LINK DOES NOT CONNECT PLEASE COPY AND PASTE).
Clearly, Om/Aum is meaningless.
OM/AUM DOES NOT EXIST.
16. SHIVA A MIRAGE
According to Hindus their Godhead consists of three personages –Brahma the Creator, Vishnu the Preserver and Shiva the Destroyer.
One Hindu source states:
“In the Vedas we do not find any reference to the concept of Trinity. During the Rigvedic period, Vishnu was a minor solar deity, while Shiva was almost unknown. The Rigvedic hymns speak of Rudra, a fierce god of the skies and thunder, father of Maruts, who was invoked mostly as the healer with wondrous medicines. But we are not sure whether he was in any way connected with the Shiva of later times.
….Contrary to the popular opinion, it was probably not the Vedic culture which prevailed during the progress of Indian civilization, but other traditions which absorbed it and assimilated it into their practices acknowledging, either fully or conditionally, the validity of the Vedas, which gradually gave birth to a complex and diverse tradition that we today identify as Hinduism.” (Color added).
http://www.hindu website.com/hinduism/hindutrinity.asp
Apart from there being no reference to the Trinity of Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva in the Vedas. As noted “Vishnu was a minor solar deity” who is now one of the major Gods of Hinduism.
It would be poor cerebration to entertain that God grows in status. And considering that the Creator (Brahma) of the Universe and its Preserver (Vishnu) would need to be established from the onset of creation.
And while Shiva, the Destroyer, may not be needed until the dissolution of the Universe, his identity would nevertheless have been established so there should not have to be uncertainty if he and Rudra, “a fierce god of the skies and thunder,” are one and the same person.
Equally significant. Hamlyn notes in his Man and his Gods, encyclopedia of the world’s religions, (p.175):
“The Vedas revile worshippers of the phallus, whereas the worship of Shiva in the form of a stone linga62 has long been wide-spread,” and that “For the great majority of peasants the most important deity is not Vishnu or Shiva, but the village goddess (gramadevata), often called Earth Goddess or Mother, significantly always feminine.”
It is doubtful the Vedas would “revile worshippers of the phallus” if such worship was of Divine inspiration; considering that Shiva is part of the Triune Godhead. And that peasants would look to “gramadevata” as “the most important deity” if Vishnu and Shiva were, respectively, Preserver and Destroyer,
Cardinal doctrines of a religion are to be clearly expressed; and not to be left to assumptions and/or inventions.
Not only is there NO Trimurti Godhead –Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva– but, admittedly, no one knows who Shiva is.
Thus, as it is assumed that Shiva is in the Veda(s) but as Shiva is not in the Veda(s) it may be said that SHIVA IS A MIRAGE.
NOTES
1. Murtahin Billah Fazlie, Hinduism and Islam, A Comparative Study, p. 226.
2. Ramayana, p.19.
3. Anoop Chandola, The Way To True Worship, p. 39.
4. Murtahin Billah Fazlie, Hinduism and Islam, A Comparative Study, pp. 23-24.
5. Ency. Brit; 15th ed; Vol; 8, p. 910).
6. Wendy Doniger O’Flaherty, Siva The Erotic Ascetic, p. 274.
7. Light Of Truth, p. 219).
8. Hamlyn, Man and his Gods, encyclopedia of the world’s religions; Third Impression 1974; pub; The Hamlyn Publishing Group Limited; p. 183.
9. Maurice Bucaille, The Bible, The Qur’an And Science, p. 34
10. Hamlyn, Man and his Gods, encyclopedia of the world’s religions, p. 183.
I1. Ibid; p. 183.
12. Ibid; p. 183.
13. Wendy Doniger O’Flaherty, Siva, The Erotic Ascetic, p. 257.
14. Hamlyn, Man and his Gods encyclopedia of the world’s religions, p. 175.
15. C. Gopalachari, C., Ramayana, p. 8.
16. Hamlyn, Man and his Gods, encyclopedia of the world’s religions, p. 184.
17. Murtahin Billah Fazlie, Hinduism and Islam, A Comparative Study, p. 23. Fazlie quotes Ambedkar, Riddle of Rama and Krishna, (1988), p. 25.
18. Swami Dayananda Saraswati, Light Of Truth, pp. 219.
19. The Way To True Worship, p. 9. Italics/emphasis added).
20. Wendy Doniger O’Flaherty, Siva The Erotic Ascetic, p. 271.
21. Anoop Chandola, The Way To True Worship, p. 23.
22. Hamlyn, Man and his Gods, encyclopedia of the world’s religions, p. 178.
23. Ency. Brit.15th Ed. Vol, 17, p. 151.
24. Ency. Brit; 15th Ed; Vol. 8, p. 911. Underlines added.
25. Chandola, Anoop, The Way To True Worship, p. 8.
26. On Hindus’ inheritance. India is yet to regain her highly coveted Kohinoor –the Taj Mahal of diamonds– illuminating Regal heads in Britain. Perhaps now that India has Super-Muscles and commands world allegiance she may yet out-wrestle the not-so-Great Britain in the arena of diplomacy and public conscience –or perhaps Her Majesty would take the grand and noble step into the High Chair of pride and dignity as befits Royal Office and voluntary gift it to the sirdars– and take home to the forbearing Indians their sparkling heritage. The Maharanis will be joyed.
27. The Higher Taste, Pub. International Society for Krishna Consciousness, (1995), pp. 38, 39.
28. Lin Yutang, Wisdom of India, p. 30. (Ital;/Emp; added).
29. Swami D, Saraswati, Light Of Truth, p. 300.
30. Ibid; p. 227.
31. Ibid; p. 285. Italics/emphasis added.
32. Swami Dayananda Saraswati, Light Of Truth, pp. 141, 285, respectively.
33. Ibid; p. 285.
34. Ibid; p.301.
35. Swami Prabhupada, commentary on Bhagavad-Gita, As It Is, 2:17.
37. Murtahin Billah Fazlie, Hinduism and Islam, A Comparative Study, pp. 192-197. Materials in italics quoted by Fazlie from W. J. Wilkins, Hindu Mythology, New Delhi, reprint, 1992. Modern Hinduism, London, reprint, 1975.
38. Ency. Brit. 15th Edn. Vol. V, p. 922; Art. Krsna.
39. Swami Dayananda Saraswati, Light Of Truth, pp. 133-138, 140.
40. This ritual cited in Wendy Doniger O’Flaherty, Śiva The Erotic Ascetic, p. 256.
41. Swami Dayananda Saraswati, Light Of Truth, p. 199.
42. Anoop Chandola, The Way To True Worship, p. 8. Italics/emphasis added.
43. C, Rajagopalachari, Ramayana, p. 90.
44. Jawaharlal Nehru, The Discovery of India, p. 108.
45. Sheldon I. Pollock The Ramayana Of Valmiki, Vol. II, p. 190. (Also p. 183).
46. Swami Prabhupada, Bhagavad-Gita As It Is, Cf. 18:3.
Since the Rig Veda is said to be Divine Revelation, it would be a contradiction to condemn animal-killing when animal-killing is enjoined in the Rig Veda. Since Rama is said to be God/an incarnate of God, and as Rama ate meat, and as Hinduism allows the eating of meat, it would be a contradiction to claim vegetarianism as the teaching of Hinduism. Also, since Rama is an incarnate of Vishnu, and since Rama ate meat, then by extension Vishnu also ate meat. And as Vishnu came also as animals, unless Vishnu fasted he must have eaten what these animals ate
47. Swami D, Saraswati, Light Of Truth, pp. 321-322.
48. Ralph T. H. Griffith, Hymns of the RgVeda, Book I, hymn CLXVI, verse 10, Vol, 1, p. 245.
49. Ibid. Book VI, hymn LXXV, verse 11, Vol, 1, p. 693.
50. Ibid; Book X, hymn XC, verses 11-12, Vol. 2, p. 559.
51. Cf. Bhagavad Gita As It Is, 4:7.
52. Abdul Haque Vidyarthi, Muhammad in World Scriptures, Vol. 1, p. 296.
53. Wisdom of India, pp. 24, 25.
54. The Discovery of India, pp. 79, 106-107. (Italics/emphasis, added).
55. Ency. Brit. 15th Edn. Vol. V, p. 52; Art. Hinduism. history of,
56. Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din, Open Letters To The Bishops Of Salisbury & London, pp. 17-18.
57. Swami Prabhupada, Bhagavad Gita As It is.
58. This reference was taken from the Internet.
59. Two quotes taken from the Internet. (Emphasis added).
60. Information taken from the Internet.
61. Light of Truth, p. 219.
62. Linga is the male phallus/penis, and Yoni is the female vagina.