Sri Rama Sivapuja

[Guest guest]

Priya Sriman Rajarathinam Bhattarji!

Jai Srimannarayana!

 

WE are very happy for your mail in detail about the

Rama's worshiping Shiva. Your suggestion not to creat

controversies it good. But not to confuse the people

is also important, right? Do not mis-interpret the

authoritative scriptures, for want of funny things.

We accept that each place may be having some story

behind it, as a Sthala Pura:na. We accept that only

upto that place. We are not going to take it as an

authority to discuss about the Pra:ma:nikatha. You

understand the difference.

 

We respect Lord Siva as a great Bha:gavatha, according

to the Great Sages Like Ve:da Vya:sa, as mentioned in

Srimath Bha:gavatham. Lord Vishnu Himself, ordered not

to criticize Lord Siva. Daksha Praja:pathi experienced

the result of it. Lord Vishnu never hated Siva not

Siva hated Vishnu. And yet, both are not one and they

have their own differences in forms and places and

wives etc., This need not to explained.

 

What people try to impose always is "there is no

Bhe:da between Siva & Vishnu". This statement is so

true. But one should have ability to understand this

also. In Sanskrit the word "BHE:DA" has two meanings.

1. difference, and 2. Clash. There is no CLASH

(differences of opinion or was) between Siva & Vishnu.

they both respect each other very well.

 

But, There is difference between both. Vishnu stays in

Paramapadam with Lakshmi, moves on Garuda a bird.

Where as lord Siva stays in Kailasam, with Pa:rvathi

and moves on Nandi, an Ox. Dress is different,

activity is different, qualities are different. Let

all these things be there but they both are very good

friends. They promote the activity of this Universe.

Why the devotees quarel with each and want to make

both of them as one? we do not understand. We love

both and we like both. Of course, we worship one only.

 

We are not having any reservation to say, people chose

anyone of these and be happy in worshiping that one

and respect the other Forms of God.

So many supposedly Great A:cha:ryas messed up this

concept and confused the devotees with lots of

non-sense things.

Who saw these forms at all? No one in these days, who

talk a great deal about these. All that, we go through

the books and know. When that is the case, follow the

authoritative way of accepting them and then talk.

Otherwise, not talking is the better way.

 

For your information a few corrections are here for

future guidance:

1) In Valmi:ki Ra:ma:yana, Ra:ma is considered only

MAN, not God. Other poets did not follow this.

 

2) The scripture starts with the discussion between

Va:lmi:ki and Na:rada. The slo:ka "Ma:nisha:da...."

appears at a later stage only.

 

3) The hunter killed a Male Bird, but not female

bird. As the slo:ka goes : yat krouncha middhuna:th

E:KAM..

Here it is pumlinga, but not sthri:linga.

 

4) De:vi Ma:ha:tmyam or De:vi Bha:gavatham, did not

enter the list of authoritative scriptures like 18

Pura:nas or 18 Upa Pura:nas, written by Sage Ve:da

Vya:sa Bhagavan. So that can never stand authority to

speak about Ra:ma:yanam.

 

5) The period of Sankara Bhagavathpa:da is 8th

Centuray AD. whereas Ra:ma:nuja's period falls in 11th

& 12th Century AD.

 

6) The periods of each Yuga have been clearly defined

and decided also by our great sages in their works.

They are 4,32,000 years for Kaliyuga, 8,64,000 years

for Dwa:parayuga, 12,96,000 years for Tre:tha yuga and

17,12,000 years for Krutha Yuga. If the whole figure

is added that becomes one Chatur Yuga. And each

Manwanthara consists of 71 Chatur Yugas. We are at

present in 7th Manwanthara. In this 27 Chaturyugas

have already passed and we are in 28th Kaliyuga.

Rama's history took place in 24th Tre:tha:yuga. Please

note down this fact. Of course, some sandhi peiod is

also there in between each Yuga. But this is enough

for now.

 

7) In Na:ra:yana Su:ktha, "sa brahma: sa sivas

se:ndras so:ksharah paramas swara:t" is the correct

version. There is no "....sa hari...." in the middle.

That has been well established by the great VEDIC

SCHOLARS, STAND FOR AUTHORITATIVENESS, long ago.

 

We discussed much about the topic and we are sure you

try to understand that we not biased in expressing the

essence of the vedic literature.

=chinnajeeyar=

--- Rajarathinam Bhattar

<rathnabhattar wrote:

> I have Send Attch

> Thank You ,

>