What did Ram and Krishna wear on their forehead?

[Guest guest]

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?

[Guest guest]

Looks logical to me.

They shoud have worn a " Pattai" rather than a "Naamam".

 

But keep watching the thread and the fun starts with some people claiming Siva is a Vaishanava, so he shud have had a naamam, and there will quotes from some puruanas prving Siva is a Vaishnava. ( thats where the real fun is)

 

But I have seen Naamam on the forehead of Ganeshji in Perumal Koil. So based on that fact, and your arguement that Ramanuja started Naamam practice, soembody might conclude that Ganesha was born after Ramanuja ( like the Sardarji Logic).

 

[Guest guest]

who cares what they wore?

[Guest guest]

The originator of this post cares what they wear.

If you dont care, what they wear, then better not Poke your nose in between.

 

[Guest guest]

It's interesting to know what they symbol wore. How did the holy ash form? Was it in a particular shape/ Also what is the reason for wearing Holy Ash.

 

The best way to find out is to see what the Vedas recommend (as they are sruti). You have to go back to the original source. Also see what is written in the Valmiki Ramayana and the Mahabharata that may describe what they wore on their forehead...or maybe they didn't wear any Ash or symbol, maybe that was a later development with sectarian movements. Many modern Hindu gurus like Vivekananda, Aurobindo and Dayananda Saraswati, I don't think wore symbols or holy ash on their forehead.

[Guest guest]

Great guidance.

And a great observation on the modern swamijis.

Just to add, to whatever you said, Ramana tore of his Holy thread after renouncing, indicating, the renounced soul is beyond caste, creed, race or sect.

 

[Guest guest]

Ram & krishna didnt put anything on their forehead.

 

Actual tatpraya for putting thirumann on vaishnavas forehead is that to symbolize that they have surrendered to Supreme God Narayana.

 

Tatpraya of putting 'Holy ash' is to symbolize that they (just) believe in God.

 

Anyway, why do you always post controversial and always support mayavadis ?

 

moreover, you can see many person in name of 'Guests' have started posting making fun of 'Vaishnavas' even before receiving any replies from a Vaishnava regarding ur query.

 

Moreover, Vivekananda was not a saint. i dunno wanna comment about Ramana & Aurobindo.

 

i dare to say that mayavadis/smarthas dont have to think they themselves superior than vaishnavas. their views/arguements are baseless & not supported by vedas.

 

these mayvadis & smarthas have to demonstrate that their views are authentic rather than bluntly making fun of 'Vaishnavas'.

 

Views of 'Ramanujacharya', 'Madhvacharya' & 'Vallabhacharya are 100% supported by Vedas. Can anyone DARE to disapprove this ?

[Guest guest]

To Priya_Asura : the tradition of wearing ashes on head was invented by "Adi shankara".

 

so theres no reason to tell lord rama & krishna smeared ashes on thie bodies.

 

To Guest : Yes Rudra is a vaishnava. theres a proof from vedas. hers the proof :

 

asya devasya mILhuSo vayA viSNoreSasya prabhRthe havirbhiH

vide hi rudro rudriyaM mahitvaM yAsiSTaM vartirashvinAvirAvat || RV 7.40.5 ||

 

this shows rudra worships vishnu. doesnt it make him as a vaishnava?

 

so wats wrong in telling that even rudra wears namam/tilak on his forehead.

 

 

 

 

[brinthan 0]

From scientific perspective, wearing "paatai" after a shower will suck out all the water that went into your head or forehead, and that would help to prevent you from gettting chill. I think we have to learn to look at our puranas from a scientific point of view.

 

Wearing "Santhanam" the yellow liquid on the middle of your forehead is to cool your soul. "Santhanam" is very cold, by wearing that your soul gets cold. And that's a good thing.

[Guest guest]

scientific does not mean that everything on puranas gets materialist and mitology.... it is most unscientific at all

[Guest guest]

Actually "Pattai" also acts as an anti perspirant. It absorbs all the sweat.

And I like your angle of looking things from scientific point.

 

TO add to whatever you said, Chandan is a real good cooling agent.

Thats why it is applied on "Mottai" mixed with "Panneer" ( Rose water). These are real cooling, and natural compared to the alcohol based after shave.

Also applying Chandan to mottai will soothe the irritated hair pores.

[Guest guest]

"why do you always post controversial and always support mayavadis ?"

 

Priya, do you descend from Shankara's hometown or another city in Kerala?

[Guest guest]

Gokul

 

If this argument of yours which says "Rudra" worshipped narayana which makes him a vaishnava. Then Rama worshipped Shiva in Rameshvaram does that make him saivite ?. so Rama (Incarnation of Narayana) is a saivite would be the conclusion. Aint it ?

[Guest guest]

I am laughing at your ignorance.

 

i had quoted it from Rig Veda. so my quote is authentic.

 

story of rama worshipping rudra is not authentic. it comes from a tamasic purana.

 

 

[Guest guest]

I am laughing at your ignorance.

 

i had quoted it from Rig Veda. so my quote is authentic.

 

story of rama worshipping rudra is not authentic. it comes from a tamasic purana.

 

 

[Guest guest]

Is Ramayan a tamasic purana ? Then what about Mahabarath ?

[Guest guest]

Does Krishna worship Durga and Shiva in Mahabharat?

[gokulkr 1]

Theres no such reference of rama worshipping rudra in 'Original Valmiki ramayana'. i have valmiki ramayana with me.

 

 

 

 

[gokulkr 1]

Generally the portion of any puranas or epics that are against vedas or smritis are considered tamasic.

 

so mahabharatha also contains some tamasic portions. such portions are not authentic.

[Guest guest]

.... to filter out those portions that are Pro Vishnu.

[Guest guest]

There must have been atleast two occasions when ram and krishna wore holy ash.Onew was when ram conducted ashwametha yagna.After that yagna the remaining holy ash has to be applied on your forehead by all,particlularly by the king.

 

Next was when krishna participated in the rajasooya yagna conducted by pandavas and ashwametha yagna conducted by pandavas.And they disguised as bhramins and went to jarasandhs palace.No bhramin went without a holy ash those days.

 

And if rama did not worship rameshwaram shiva,you should tell me what to do with that temple.

[Guest guest]

The proof is the Majestic temple that has stood the test of time.

It need not be in any book.

Rameswaram is only of the holiest places on earth.

 

And Rama also worshipped Surya. SO does it mean Surya is more poweful than Rama ( Vishnu ) or what?

 

Apply the same standards to all scriptures.

You always have a close minded arguement.

 

And for your information, Saint Agastya, who passed on the Aditya Hrudaya mantra to Rama himself wore a " Pattai".

 

So the practice of "Pattai" was much before Shankara. So dont blabber like a School Payyan and Arai Nijar Payyan in front of learned people ( Like Barney, Atanu, etc, whom I hold in high esteem).

[Guest guest]

Gokul

 

How do you know what you have is the "Original" Ramayana composed by Valmiki. Parts of the epic might have been added or discarded in time. Iam giving you an example of a temple which is still there which derived its name becos of Rama worshipping Ishwara and you doubt that. If we start doubting everything then there wont be anything left to believe.

[gokulkr 1]

sorry your arguements are baseless.

 

sthala purana of rameswaram temple is tamasic. they are not authentic. its just a ancient rudra temple, thats all.

 

 

[Guest guest]

Gokul once wanted to know the authenticity of the Madurai temple. And he was not convinced with Tiruvilayadal Purana, and the Temple Stala Purana.

 

But he got convincee when there was some reference to the temple in some Vaishnava Temple.

 

My Only question is " Why discriminate against Saivites and Smarhtas?Are only Vaishnava Scriptures authentic? Are non Vaishnava Scriptures not authentic?"

 

When it comes to Vaishnava Scriptures everything is Saatvic and when it comes to Non Vaishnave scriptures, its all Tamasic. I simply cannot understand the logic behind this discrimination.

 

I think its high time Vaishanvas answer these questions.