What did Ram and Krishna wear on their forehead?

[Guest guest]

Here most of the people are keen in telling "Vaishnava scriptures" as tamasic, without even demonstrating it.

 

I had asked them to demonstrate that shaiva texts are satvic. but instead of demonstrating they seem to hurl abuses at me just because i dont agree with their views.

 

theres a thread in this forum about "Buddha". there a vaishnva has clearly given details about "Adi-buddha" & difference with "Gautama-buddha". refer it if you want.

 

without even knowing anything about "adi-buddha" they just abuse me as a school kid and equate "adi-buddha" with "adi-shankara" just because word "adi" occurs.

 

Anyway, these people here seem to be arrogant in nature. so theres no use in arguing with them. they feel that this thread is for shaivatees only & they feel that my presence here pollutes this thread.

 

So i am leaving this thread, as whatever i say these people will discriminate it & hurl abuses at me. sametime they also wont demonstrate their views. (demonstrating means quoting from vedas, not from puranas)

 

i will be happy if priya changes her name from priya_vaishnava to priya_mayavadi.

 

May Krishna bless you all.

 

/images/graemlins/smile.gif Om Shri Krishna Saranam Mama.

[Guest guest]

anyone speaking with you gets angry, tink about it, the problem is that in this way everyone should think that all vaishnavas are fanatics, so please be responsible and have a good behaviour, nicer than your opponents

[Guest guest]

< --- anyone speaking with you gets angry, --- >

 

not everyone. only "fundamental" mayavadis/shaivatees get angry with me just because i dont agree with their views. of course it may be their nature.

 

i kindly request you to go the beginning of this thread. there you can clearly see who misbehaved to whom ? who discriminated whom ? i till now havent hurled any abusing/discriminating words to anyone in this thread.

 

i expected here a healthy discussion, but people here doesnt seemed to be discuss/demonstrate, rather they blame meaninglessly.

 

anyway as a vaishnava, its a duty to express views without hurling abuses. that what i am doing in this thread. since people are not receptive i am leaving this thread.

 

/images/graemlins/smile.gif Om Shri krishna saranam mama

[Guest guest]

people are not receptive (maybe)... or you are not explaining properly

 

(actually you never explain or demonstrate.. simply you dictate: "this is like that...".. i am sorry but it is not good, not a good propaganda for vaishnavas)

[Guest guest]

Actually Raghuramnji (i highly respect him) has already demonstrated everything. but you can see mayavadis hurling abuses to mr.raghuramanji (in many thread) just because they dont agree with Mr.Raghuramanji.

 

so it is not to me only, whenenver a vaishnavas expresses his stand, mayavadis/shaivatees hurl abuses at them, of course they are tamasic.

 

so even if i demonstrate i had quote same whatever Raghuramanji has quoted already in this forum (as vedas are common to all). in turn i will get abuses only hurled at me rather than a healthy discussion.

 

so no use in demonstrating to a fundamental mayavadi/shaivatee.

[Guest guest]

Gokul,

 

This thread was not anti-vaishnava. It simply asked what they wore on their forehead, as Vashnavism is built upon Rama and Krishna as Vishnu's incarnation, people wanted to know what they followed ot wore on their forehead. It is YOU who have this bad habit of hijacking peoples threads and pushing Vaishnava propaganda.

[Guest guest]

Gokul

 

I now ask you humbly , please tell me about Adi Buddha.All along i was thinking Gautam Buddha was the incarnation . What did Adi Buddha do as eacth avatar had a reason for its incarnation. If you tell this it would be very helpful.

[Guest guest]

i dunno which guest you are ?

 

in this beginning of the thread, you can see some guests making fun of vaishnavas commenting (ie., making fun of) vaishnavas beliefs (ie., vaishnvas belief of rudra as vaishnava). their tone was soo cheap.

 

so only i came here to prove that they are wrong. but instead of doing healthy debate they hurled abuses at me.

 

anyway lets forget it.

[Guest guest]

Dear sakteramji,

 

Adi-Buddha was a avatar taken by krishna during thretha yuga.

 

after the war, some pseudo-brahmins confused the pandavas that they were guilty of killing the kauravas.

 

pandavas were soo misguided by the pseudo-brahmins that they (pandavas) forgot they were guided by Lord krishna during war time & Lord Krishna had already told pandavas that killing kauravas is not a sin. but overcomed by words of pseudo-brahmins, they forgot krishnas words & pseudo-brahmins told pandavas to conduct a yagna (& animal sacrifice)to wash their sins.

 

Lord krishna decided to save the pandavas from going in wrong path. So lord incarnated as "Adi-buddha" (a saintly form) and arrived at the yagna spot. Bhima immediately recognised "Adi-buddha" as God himself, since Bhima is incarnation of Vayu-deva. Adi-buddha debated with pseudo-brahmins & proved that their approach is false. Thus the yagna was stopped. After "Adi-buddha" vanished. It was a avatar of short time only.

 

So it is "Adi-buddha" referred as buddha avatar in "Sathvic puranas".

 

In kali-yuga, siddhartha was named as "Gautama buddha". due to the similiarity in name, people of later period began to treat "Gautama buddha" as buddha avatar. Gautama buddha was just a saint. He was not a incarnation. Gautama had never told hes a god/incarnation. only people mistook him as avatara. Even Gautama buddha had worshipped "Adi-buddha". even Gautama had visited the shrine of "Adi-buddha".

Now everything has got mixed.

 

i think you are convinced with the above facts.

 

/images/graemlins/smile.gif Om Namah Shivaya

/images/graemlins/smile.gif Om Namo Venkatesaya

 

[Guest guest]

Gokul

 

Thanks. It is very interesting to know new things. Is there a temple for Adi buddha any where ?

[Guest guest]

adi buddha & gautama buddha got mixed due to the misconception of people. i dunno whether there is seperate shrine for adi-buddha.

[Guest guest]

Gokul,

Ram and Krishna did not wear anything on their fore heads?Why? Were they not Hindus? Is it Hindu tradition?

[Guest guest]

yesterday night i discovered that Lord Rama had worn vaishnava symbol on his forehead. It was a "U" shaped with a dot in the bottom middle. Its clearly specified in Valmiki Ramayana. of course, it was not thirumann (as thirumann evolved only in 9th century AD-kali yuga)

 

I dunno whether Lord krishna had worn or not. we should remember that Lord krishna behaved much like God rather than a human. wearing a namam specfiies one has surrendered to God Narayana. Sincce krishna behaved as God, there would no necessary for him to wear anything on his forehead, as he himself is God there would be no necessary for him to surrender to any other God. "But Rama behaved as human & so he wore nama".

 

/images/graemlins/smile.gif Om Namah Shivaya

/images/graemlins/smile.gif Om Namo Venkatesaya

[Guest guest]

krsna has tilaka, vaishnava symbol.. he behave many times as a vaishnava (to show behaviour, he's vishnu), he was disciple of sandipani muni, he has in nanda maharaja's house siva lingam and varaha deva murti, he steals bhoga offerings when gargamuni is doing puja... and many other things

[Guest guest]

Ram wore namam?You read in valmiki ramayan?I thought so far that Valmiki ramayan was written by Valmiki. Now i am surprised to know that it was written by Gokul.Which verse of Ramayan says so?Can you recite that?

 

Who said that Krishna did not behave as a human like Lord Ram?Every avathar after narasimha avathar behaved perfectly Human.They all showed us how to be a model human.

 

By the way I am interested to know where in Valmiki Ramayan that info is contained.

[Guest guest]

Hi

 

I would like to clarify that Rama and his predecessors always worshipped Sun God. I believe that Vishnu avatarams had prayed more to the "Pancha Bhoodhangal" and not prayed to one of their counter parts.

 

[Guest guest]

Rama worshipped Sun God.... to show the right behaviour to the humans... actually the sun god is his subordinated

[Guest guest]

Valmiki Ramayan doesnt say that Ram built the Rameshwaram temple.But a question arises here.Ravan was a bhramin.So if he is killed Ram must have done the rituals to ward off bhramahathi.That was not given in Valmiki Ramayan.

 

And Lord Ram was Vishnu showing humans how to be a perfect human.So He inspite of being god,lived the life of a ksathriya and human.So he must have done those rituals.The only place where the rituals are mentiond is in the sthal purana of Rameshwaram temple.So defenitely he must have build the shiv ling there.

 

And there is a temple in nearby thiruchengattangudi where ARam built another shiv ling to remove the veera hathi dhosham by killing ravana.Since ranava was a brave soldier,by killing such a soldier one gets the veer hathi dosham.So that temple is also there.

 

So Ram woreshipped shiva.Shiva worshipped Lord Ram.And I haev read another purana which says that seetha is none other than shiva himslef.

[Guest guest]

I see no conclusive answers have been provided to this.

[Guest guest]

Hello Gokul,

 

<Gokul>

I dunno whether Lord krishna had worn or not. we should remember that Lord krishna behaved much like God rather than a human. wearing a namam specfiies one has surrendered to God Narayana. Sincce krishna behaved as God, there would no necessary for him to wear anything on his forehead, as he himself is God there would be no necessary for him to surrender to any other God. "But Rama behaved as human & so he wore nama".

</Gokul>

 

I went thru this lengthy debate on wearing something on forehead.

 

But as you have mentioned above, I got one question to ask you.

 

I heard and read that the 3 namas (two white and one red) which we put on our forehead got the following significance.

 

Two white - The holy feet of Narayana

One red - Symbol of Mahalakshmi

 

If the above lines are true then my question is

 

"Why we have to put Thirunamam for Balaji/Srinivasa or any other Vishnu God?"

 

I appriciate if you provide me some details from some books.

 

Srini

 

 

 

[BinduMadhav]

Priya_Vaishnavaa wrote:

 

-----------

What did ram and Krishna wear on their forehead?certainly they did not wear the "Namam" which vaishnavites wear today.This Namam originated with Ramanuja. Before that every vedic religion follower wore only the holy ash.

 

So Lord Ram and Krishna must have defenitely worn the holy ash in their forehead, which is so despised by their worshippers today. How ironic,isnt it?

------------

 

Very clever, are you not, my good Saivite with a sweet name? Nice trouble-maker /images/graemlins/grin.gif. In the older days, the kings almost always wore Gandha (sandal paste). Even now, young Brahmacharis, even Saivite ones at that, wear the sandal paste, not Vibhuti. Plus, not all Vibhuti-dhAris are worshippers of Siva /images/graemlins/cool.gifand not all NAmadhAris are lovers of Siva. I know several Ayyangars who love and worship Siva /images/graemlins/mad.gif.

[Guest guest]

Because you are confused..