The problems of archaeological interpretation are most evident in attempts to reconstruct religious practices.
Early archaeologists thought that certain objects which seemed unusual or unfamiliar may have had a religious significance.
Harappan religion is made on the assumption that later traditions provide parallels with earlier ones.
This is because archaeologists often move from the known to the unknown, that is, from the present to the past.
While this is plausible in the case of stonequerns and pots, it becomes more speculative when we extend it to “religious” symbols.
The “proto-Shiva” seals
The earliest religious text, the Rigveda (compiled c. 1500-1000 BCE) mentions a god named Rudra, which is a name used for Shiva in later Puranic traditions (in the first millennium CE).
However, unlike Shiva, Rudra in the Rigveda is neither depicted as Pashupati (lord of animals in general and cattle in particular) nor as a yogi. Hence, Statement 1 is correct.
In other words, this depiction does not match the description of Rudra in the Rigveda. Hence, Statement 2 is incorrect.
Some scholars consider it a Shaman. Hence, Statement 3 is correct.
Shamans are men and women who claim magical and healing powers, as well as an ability to communicate with the other world