http://mdn.mainichi-msn.co.jp/internationa...0in018000c.html
[/quote]
Thai crown princess denied entry into famous Hindu temple in eastern India

BHUBANESHWAR, India -- Thailand's Crown Princess Sirindhorn was denied entry to a famous Hindu temple in eastern India because she is a foreigner and is a Buddhist, an official said Monday.

Foreigners and non-Hindus are not allowed inside many of the temples in the eastern state of Orissa, including the 12th-century Jagannath Temple, dedicated to an incarnation popular Hindu god Vishnu.

Sirindhorn, on a three-day tour of the region as an ambassador for the U.N. World Food Program, was not allowed into the temple when she visited Sunday, said a state official who asked not to be identified because of the sensitivity of the issue.

She instead viewed the building from a nearby rooftop in Puri, along a coastal strip of Orissa that has long shared trade and cultural ties with Thailand and other Southeast Asian countries.

Although Indian Buddhists are allowed inside the temple because many Hindus consider Buddha to be a reincarnation of Vishnu, the rule doesn't apply to Buddhists of foreign origin.

Thai officials could not be immediately reached for comment.

Several temples in Orissa, an impoverished state with conservative values, follow similarly rigid rules and have raked controversies in the past.

Former Prime Minister Indira Gandhi -- a born Hindu -- was denied entry into the Jagannath Temple even when she was in power because she married a Parsi, who follow the ancient Zorastrian faith.
[/quote]

Ok, I don't get it! How come Indian Buddhists are allowed and not Thai Buddhists? Wasn't the last Thai King A Hindu God King(that too of Rama)?Are sikhs allowed inside the temple? Even hindu converts aren't allowed in!

I wonder if Balinese hindus are allowed inside the premises? Can anyone shed any light into the temple policies?

Hmm how would they know she's a foreigner? She shoulda ditched the entourage and went in incognito.

Jagganath Temple.......its a very cool place. I hope they allow the Princess to go in on account of her royalty.

Just a side note....the English word "Juggernaut" comes from the Sanskrit word "Jagganath" (which I think means supreme lord of much power)....

Yup you are right. All Thai king is called "King Rama"
Eg: King Rama 9 This just adopt from hindu.
We also practice many of the hindu culture like we have the harvest day and we have the day that we pay respect for the river godess
We have the city name Ayudhaya = Ayothaya in Ramayana.

It doesn't make sense that the officer not allow the princess to get in.

I think the priests do not know about Thai history and culture. They are allowing Sri Lankan Buddhists but not Thai Buddhists. I think they need to be educated on Thailands' close cultural and historic relationships with India.

Yeah i saw Ayudhaya before and instantly thought of Ayodhaya =o

Too bad that the princess wasn't allowed in

This temple restriction and religious discrimination is soo lame.....

Such insolence on the priest's part. Her Royal Majesty should have been allowed; considering she is daughter of His Majesty King Rama IX THE GREAT.

I could care less if someone was royalty, but if anyone wants to enter a temple with a pious heart I don't see why they should be denied.

Same here. I don't care if she is royalty, but I don't think there should be a double standards. If sri lankan or nepali buddhists are allowed so should thai buddhists.

What they don't know is that Thai Buddhists (as well as Lao and Khmer Buddhists) pray to Hindu gods as well. How ironic.

Those Indian priests are very ignorant about Thailand and South-East Asia. Thais generally follow the same kind of Buddhism that Indian Buddhists follow, so there should be no reason for them to accept Indian Buddhists while rejecting Thai Buddhists. I think the only reason they reject Thai Buddhists is because they're Mongoloids. In other words, those priests were racist.

Why did Her Royal Majesty wanted to visit the Puri Jaganath Temple in Orissa ?

I feel the Princess like the rest of the Thai elites have been duped recently by the Indian authorities especially Orissa Tourism Department. They are vehemently pushing a myth that Thailand's Indian influence was from Orissa.

My Indian Malaysian friend who is Tamil and went to India recalled she and her family..........was treated rudely at a temple coz the priests or whoever it was said she's 'untouchable' and even extorted money as a fine. Her family was also treated badly at a 5 star hotel at northern indian......thinking her family a stray poor low caste tamil family , though her father is a doctor

I tot Buddhists could visit Hindu temples. My friend even say its common for Buddhists to participate in Hindu ceremonies like the Thaipusam ????????? Some Buddhists even pray to the Hindu gods vice versa.

Hindu temples in India are not pleasant, most major temples dont allow foreigners inside. The smaller minor ones do, but then the priest will hassle "visitors" for money, donations etc.



Thai, Chinese Malayasian and Singapore Buddhists/Taoists do that, but India its a different story.

In traditional thinking: The princess is actually "unclean". She's Thai and Thai's (except Isaan) are non-veg right? Could be a good reason why she was not allowed in the temple.

I've seen plenty of foreign people in major temples in India. And you have to feel sympathy for the priests who ask for money, they have very little income to survive on while muslim mullahs are given a state salary and flown to Mecca. Secular India indeed.

Traditionally Hindus are non veg that includes Kings.

In Jagantha Puri a beef or porking eating non Hindu Indians, who despise Hinduism are allowed into the temple, whereas veg Non- Indians e.g the Hare Krishnas are denied entry.



Foreign visitors are allowed into non functioning temples only. Btw most temples in India are slowing becoming non-functional, due to conversion and discrimination by the brahmins, adminstrators and politicians.

Why blame Secular India", how have the elite Hindus contributed to their religion's development in India ?

Traditionally Hindus are NOT non-veg. I don't know much about South or East India, but in the North, we don't touch meat.

Same on the topic of temples. Here in the north, all of our temples are fully functional and increasing in visitors (mostly due to NRI's). I don't know much about the situation elsewhere in India, but in Punjab, Himachal Pardesh, etc. temples are overflowing (especially shrines like Baba Balaknath, Chamunda Devi, etc.)

Contrary to your claim its the South that is most veg, the Northern cuisine is Islamic - Mughal.



I had specified "major temples" not unknown localised shrines, and the discussion in on non Indians not NRIs or Indians visiting these temples.

I'm not sure what North India you are talking about, but it sure isn't the North India I'm from. Our cuisine is not "Islamic Mughal", not by a longshot. Our cuisine is 100% Indian, and we don't use halal meat or whatever Islamic cusine is made of.

And for your information, Baba Balaknath IS a major temple and is visited by thousands yearly (from both Hindu and Sikh faiths). Chamunda Devi might be considered a local shrine, sure. But both of these temples are visited in large numbers, and as far as foriegners are concerned-- they can visit all they like, no one is going to stop them.

Thats what you been told - North Indian cuisine is Indian, actual fact it is not.

Cuisine of North and South India
source http://www.haandi.com/food.htm

Food patterns in India can certainly be linked to a region's natural environment and religious practices, but foreign influence also played a large part. During the 16th century, Muslims from western Asia invaded northern India. Their affect on the culture is visible today in what was named Mughal cuisine. This Middle East influence brought more meat dishes (kebabs, except pork), spices, nuts, and the idea of ending a meal with a dessert.

Alternately, the prominently vegetarian Hindu diet of the South features more rice, lentils, and vegetables cooked with yogurts, pickles, and chilies. Dals are common purees of chickpeas, mung beans, or kidney beans, and accompany nearly every meal.


Baba Balaknath is not a traditional Hindu temple, like Jaganath Puri, Tirupathi (Andra Pradesh) or Guru vayur (Kerala). These traditionally orthodox temples don't allow Non-Indians inside the temples.
Bala Balaknath is a personality based cult like Sai Baba, Hare Krishna and other new age Indian guru who accept non Indians freely.

"YOU SHALL NOT PASS!!!"

Hmm most of the people in Gujarat are vegetarians.

If you carefully Re-Read the above parahraph, you'll notice that its only talking about a specific type of cuisine known as "Mughal Cuisine", which is NOT the dominant North Indian type of cuisine, but instead is a specialized form of cuisine that is not what the average North Indian eats. If anything, Mughal cuisine is simply a culinary art rather than an average food. Also, since it contains meat in it, most religious Hindus and Sikhs can't eat it anyway.

Typically, North Indian meals consist of chapatis or rotis and rice as staples, eaten with a wide variety of side dishes like dals, curries, yoghurt, chutney and achars. South Indian dishes are mostly rice-based, sambhar, rasam and curries being important side dishes. Coconut is an important ingredient in all South Indian food.


So, if you don't mind me asking, which part of India are you from (if you are Indian that is)....

For South india. Hyderabi cuisine that is related to meat products is heavily mughal influenced.

I don't know about other temples but I do know Tirupathi allows everyone inside regardless of their race or religion.

From the link - http://www.haandi.com/food.htm
There are 2 major Indian cuisine
1 - North Indian - Muslim influenced since 16th Century
2 - South Indian predominately vegetarian.

From http://www.haandi.com/food.htm
The development of vegetarianism in India is often linked to southern cuisine, partly because the Brahmins of some northern regions (such as Kashmir and Bengal) are not strict vegetarians.



From http://www.haandi.com/food.htm

North and South India also differ in their choice of grain, the staple of all Indian cuisine. Rice is the basis of southern cuisine, while wheat is used in the north.

Muslims traditionally prepare chapatis, circles of wheat dough cooked on a flat griddle and served with hot curry; and naan, a leavened bread baked in a tandoor



I am not an Indian.

I have read the article and nowhere does it say that the entire north indian cuisine is mughal but rather it talks about one particular cuisine that was influenced by mughals called Mughal cuisine. There are dozons of other cuisines and mughal cusine is one of them.

So muslims have chappattis, so what? As far as I know rotis were prepared as long back as 5000 years ago from Harrapans. So, North Indians eating chappatis doesn't make it mughal influenced if that is your argument.

EDIT:Your basing your entire argument from a food recipe site. I suggest you get another source.

EDIT 2: I personally don't think non-hindus should be allowed to hindu temples(but hindus of all religions/races should be allowed including Hare Krishna). Major hindu temples are religious destinations not tourist places. The foreigners are not there to practise the religion. They would be nothing more than nuisance at the temples taking photographs. For example Tirupathi is a very busy temple, and the last thing i want is some tourist running around the temple taking photographs(wait, cameras aren't even allowed in temples). Also, most non-hindus aren't aware of dos' and don't in hindu temple and may end up doing something very stupid.

About Hare Krishna. I think the temple authorities don't consider them real hindus but rather some imposters. Besides Hare Krishna has a very bad rep and I guess they don't want to associate with them.

Why would Hare Krishna followers go to Jagannath? The last time I read, Most temples in Orissa are Hari Hara temples. It would be uncharacteristic of ISKCON followers to go to Hari hara temples. ISKCON followers believe krishna to be one true god, there is no way they would go to hari hara(shiva & Vishnu) temples

That was only a link I used as refernence , here is more for you
http://www.askmen.com/fashion/wine_and_din..._wine_dine.html
The culinary divide in India is North-South, because of climatic, historical and geographic variations. With colder weather, the need for sustenance in the North is acute. As such, meat is eaten much more than in the south.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_cuisine
Islamic rule resulted in a blending of the non-vegetarian fare of the Middle East and the rich gravies that were indigenous to India, creating what is known as Mughlai cuisine. India was also introduced to kebabs and pilafs (or pulaos). The Mughals were great patrons of cooking. Lavish dishes were prepared during the reigns of Jahangir (1605-27) and Shah Jahan (1627-58). It was in this period that the Portuguese introduced vegetables like potatoes and tomatoes in India.

Basicaly India has 2 cuisine - North and South
North has Middle Eastern/Persian influence, with its regional variation like Kashmiri, Punjabi, Bengali etc


Please give me the reference to substantiate the above on roti.


Chapati is not originally Indian and that is a fact



I have given more sites



I am not interested in your personal opinions what is your religion's stand on these issues ?



Are you a spokesperson for Hinduism ?


FYI, Puri Jaganath is a Hari temple and Hare Krishnas trace their history to the temple.

The celebrated Temple of Lord Jagannath now existent at Puri was constructed by Raja Ananta Varman Chodaganga Dev in 12th century A.D. The wooden images of Jagannath Balabhadra and Subhadra were installed in that temple.
http://www.jagannathpuri.blessingsonthenet.com/



From
http://www.swordoftruth.com/cgi-bin/forum....isplay&num=2273

Actually, when I went to Lord Jaganath temple in Puri, I was wearing traditional Indian clothing and was with my mother (who is white but was wearing a sari), my wife and her family. But our family priest told us that we could only look from the library near the temple - he didn't seem to want me to enter. The same happens for Iskcon devotees, who are mostly white - they are forced to stay outside the temple. Of course, I give devotion to Jaganath, along with Ganesh, Krishna and Shiva, every day. But it would be fulfilling to give offerings to Jaganath at Puri, which is the most spiritually uplifting places I have ever been to. Ironically, my marriage has been registered at Jaganath temple and apparently I am now a member of my wife's Kshatriya caste. But I am not regarded as a Hindu because of my colour. Yet, I know of Indian Christians who have gone to Jaganath temple as tourists, simply because they "look" Hindu rather than believing Hinduism!!!

Check out this link: http://www.historyforkids.org/learn/food/millet.htm

An excerpt from the article:


The last time I checked roti is chapathi.



Even the above quote is talking about Mughal Cuisine. And you are talking as if mughal cuisine is the only one in india. Also from the wiki, the mughal influence was just one of many influences. It isn't the only one.



Hinduism doesn't differentiate between hindus and non-hindus, and isn't run by mullahs and popes. Infact there is no scripture of authority one has to adhere.



Yes, i am a spokesperson for my brand of hinduism. And so are over Majority of hindus out there (Excluding swaminaraynans, ISCkon, Arya Samaj etc.). All other organizations I mentioned are organized and are a miniscule of hindu population. As soon as you understand that hinduism is not like abrahamic relgions you would understand it.



If they trace their history to this temple, then why aren't they allowed?

Regardless, Indian Govt controls these temples anyway. Its' not like priests really have a say.

None of those above links point to Mughal Cusine as being the main cusine of North India. That's because its not. North Indian cuisine is primarily vegetarian, as it is primarily Muslims who eat meat, not Hindus and sikhs. The word "roti" itself is an Indian word, meaning food, or more specifically a fulka.

" A typical Punjabi meal with consist of roti, daal, yogurt and curried vegetable. Many Punjabi eat rice very infrequently and only on special occasions. Punjabi meals usually have lot of onion, tomatoes, cumin, turmeric, mustard, garlic, ginger cooked in pure cow ghee. Milk is a very important part of Punjabi food in its many form such as yogurt (dahi), lassi, paneer, makhan (white butter) and ghee."

http://www.food-india.com/region/punjabi.htm


" Punjabi cuisine (from The Punjab region of Northern India) is mainly based upon Wheat, Masalas (spice), pure desi ghee, with liberal amounts of butter and cream. Though wheat varieties form their staple food, Punjabis do cook rice on special occasions. During winter a delicacy, Rao Ki Kheer, is cooked using rice. Rice is cooked for a long time in sugar cane juice."

http://www.answers.com/main/ntquery;jsessi...njabi%20cuisine

Well, the above is not that hard to answer. It has nothing to do with religion but rather ppl's opinions. and prejudices Balinese did not allow Indian hindus to enter hindu temples in Bali, because they didn't look balinese and hence not hindu. The same thing here, except it is towards whites. It's ethnic prejudice, and will go away, if more and more white hindus enter temple, which will force indian govt to change its stance. Since, the temple board is controlled by indian govt, it is the indian govt that makes the rules, and there have been numerous articles on this. I read an article by one of the chief priests of Jagannath Temple(I will try to find the article) and he wrote most priests support the foreigners(hindus) but the board(Indian Govt) isn't allowing the change.

It is quite ironic that India's most powerful leader of modern era, indira gandhi was denied entry into the temple.

From your site -
http://www.food-india.com/indianCuisine/10..._tour_india.htm

Southern Indians generally speaking, have been orthodox in their tastes, probably because eating meat when it is hot all year round can be difficult.

In the North, the weather varies from a scorching heat to a nail-biting cold, with a sprinkling of showers in between. So, the food here is quite rich and heavy. Also, the Mughal influence has resulted in meat-eating habits among many North Indians. Also, a variety of flours are used to make different types of breads like chapathis, rotis, phulkas, puris and naan.

My point
a) South India is mostly vegetarian
b) North Indian cuisine has Mughal influence

Still want to dispute

A) I don't disagree that South India is mostly vegetarian, but the point I'm trying to make is that the north isn't any less vegetarian in terms of basic cusine.

B) Yes, the north does have some Mughal influences, I'm not denying that. The point I'm trying to make is that the Mughal influences are on artistic culinary cusine and not on daily average cusine.

Nothing left to dispute.

It's retarded to say that n-indians eat meat because mughals came in. That is just non-sense. Regardless, meat is a very big part of s.india. Its a stereotype that s.indian food is primarily vegeterian. Since meat is expensive not everyone can afford it, thats all.

When you're talking about N. India you just talking about Punjab? Most Gujaratis are vegetarians. The climate of NW India is different from S. India so naturally people are gonna grow different crops.

The truth - North Indians are culturally and genetical corrupted by successive foreign invaders - is too bitter and embarassing for pan-Indian nationalists to admit.

You some sort of Tamil nationalist?

He is not even Indian. I think he has an agenda against N.Indians.

Now you've completly gone off the deep end. Nobody is going to take anything you have to say seriously......

Have you or any of your fellow countrymen factually proven me wrong ?
i.e
North India was invaded and dominated by Central , Middle East Asians and Persians, thus resulting in the hybrid race and culture

Haven't needed to. Your arguments haven't had a solid base to begin with.

Not really.

North India was indeed invaded during the last 500 years, but the cultural influence was minimal. We have more in common with our brethern to the south than we do with Persians, Tartars, or Arabs.

We aren't a hybrid race either, as inter-marriage and inter-breeding with invaders was marginal. Our culture isn't hybrid either, its 100% Indian with nominal outer influences.

History for Indian kids

Muslim India
Around 1000 AD, the Arabs who had already conquered Persia (modern Iran) came to conquer India as well. Arab troops were able to beat the Indians and take over northern India (and modern Pakistan). Little by little, many Hindus and Buddhists in northern India decided to convert to Islam.

The Arabs set up a very successful government in northern India.

In the 1200's, this arrangement was threatened by the invasion of the Mongols under Ghengis Khan. But the Islamic rulers managed to get their power back again.

Southern India, on the other hand, never came under Islamic control, and remained Hindu.
source : http://www.historyforkids.org/learn/india/history/muslim.htm

Cultural influence

Islamic traditions blended with language, dress, cuisine, architecture, social customs and values of the natives to give rise to much of present day Indian culture. Numerous scientific and mathematical advances and the Hindu-Arabic numerals were spread to the rest of the world [2]. The languages brought by Islam were modified by contact with local languages leading to the creation of several new languages, such as Urdu, which uses the modified Arabic script, but with more Persian words. The influences of these languages exist in several dialects in India today. Islamic and Mughal architecture and art is widely noticeable in India, examples being the Taj Mahal and Qutub Minar.

source http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_invasion_of_India

For more info - refer to the following site

http://www.gatewayforindia.com/history/muslim_history.htm

wikipedia? You're joking.

history for kids was not written by an Indian.
And the last one, have you noticed that the author is a muslim?

Oh really? Perhaps you are conviniently forgetting a place called HYDERABAD which is located in the southern portion of India. And lets not forget that the Mughals (who were Turkish, not Arabs) also controlled the northern half of Karnatika. Only the very southern tip of India was out of their reach, but that area itself was annexed by the French later on (and I suppose now youre going to draw the false conclusion that Tamil culture must be French influenced )

Another blatant fallacy.

This website (History for kids...wtf?) has no academic credibility. I want solid proof showing that Hindus (and whatever non-existent Buddhists that this website claims were alive during Mughal times) were converting to Islam as part of "Their Own Decsion". It is well know that those who converted did so at the point of sword.

Also, Like I said before, Mughals were Turkish, not Arabs. There was already a pre-existing government in India at the time of Mughal Invasion, and the Mughals simply modified it to put themselves at the top.

This website is so fu-king stupid. The Mughals came after the time of Genghis Khan's Mongol empire. In fact, Mughal rulers such as Babar and Ackbar claimed to trace their ancestry BACK to Genghis Khan. Also, any invasions by the Mongols were defeated by the RAJPUTS, not the Mughals (who came decades later).