Discussion on answer by The Destroyer: Where is it mentioned that Krishna and Rama Worshipped Shiva Lingam?

1:44 AM

@Krishna first of all I misinterpreted your previous statement "This is accepted even by hard core shavaite and Advaita scholars also. They also accept that the Valmiki Ramayana doesn't mean Mahadeva in the yuddha khanda context is Siva." .... I thought you are telling that in Yuddha Kanda where Mahadeva is mentioned it is referred to Sea God... so I quoted Vrishadvja verse... so you thought I'm quoting out of context verse...

@Krishna Just show me a single place where Sea God is called by the name Mahadeva in whole Valmiki Ramayana...

In the SetuBandhanam episode Sea God is always called by the name "Mahodadhi"..

So as per me... if it was Sea God Rama would simply quote Mahodadhi and other names...

However I'm not the only who translate it as Shiva... every online translations I've seen translate it as Shiva... see here valmikiramayan.net/utf8/yuddha/sarga123/…

However it is ambigious and it doesn't necessarily mean Shiva... It might also mean sea God...

Also some intrepretreters like here agniveer.com/sita-agnipariksha speculate Gods coming to sky and Fire test is latter addition... so it might be possible that to add those someone ommitted those verses where Rama worshipped Shiva during Setu Bandhanam...

However it remained in that part where Rama was telling to Sita in shortcut...

However Personally I do not agree with that Agniveer intrepretation... I'm just showing possibilities...

The Destroyer

2:46 AM

"Valmiki Ramayana there seems to be unanimity that Mahadeva in Verse 6.123.19 is not Siva or Rudra " . Do you know meaning of the word " unanimity"? How Verse say unanimously it is Ocean God? Mahadeva is Shiva and most Scholars translate this way. You didn't even say those Scholars names. You couldn't even give the verses where Ocean God is explicitly mentioned as MahaDeva. It looks like those (nonexistent) Scholars and you got infuriated as Shiva is Mahadeva.

@Krishna Don't make allegations out of thin air. Give those Scholars commentaries if you are sure. But without proof, don't say words like many, hardcore Shaivites and Advaitins.

@Krishna I'm talking to you like a pure Shaivite as you are talking like pure Vaishnavaite.

user131058

6:00 AM

@Tezz - Allegations, What Allegations did I make? I just said just because you interpret in way doesn't mean it is right. The rule applies to you too...Now you say who the scholars are scholars like ChandrasekharSastrys who is advaitin and more a shaiva, cleacleaaccept the episode of Valmiki Ramayana, Mahadeva is not Siva.

user131058

shaivates can't accept this because of the mind set( I am calling you shaiva the as you are yourself saying that you are talking from Shaiva side) Just because Mahadeva here doesn't refer to Siva seems to make You and your fellow shaivas go ballistic. So, first control your horses than talk and then start reasoning.

user131058

Your incomplete reading of Yuddha Khanda will lead to confusion only. Please read properly. Ocean is referred as Iswara and also Mahodadhi too. Again you say Valmiki Ramayana.net... The authors of this site , if I am not wronghad, said Valmiki didn't write Yuddha Khanda and Bala Khanda.

user131058

6:21 AM

@Tezz - Well a small info. You keep saying that you are talking from Shaivates point of view. Then if that is the case you will never accept, what I say. Even if we assume hypothetically Mahadeva in this verse is Siva, it doesn't reduce the supremacy of Raama or Lord Vishnu. But, the only reason why it is not SiVa is there no proper evidence at all in case of Valmiki Ramayana

The Destroyer

@Krishna You are referring Tezz not me.

@Krishna You didn't give any commentary by him.

user131058

@Tezz - You ask about the meaning of Unanimity ? Well, when I said unanimity, it means many of the so called scholars of advaita and some shaiva and many Vaishnava scholars consider that Mahadeva in this episode is not Siva. See, you again jump your horses.

The Destroyer

@Krishna Aha.. my incomplete reading of Yuddha Khanda. "Even if we assume hypothetically Mahadeva in this verse is Siva, it doesn't reduce the supremacy of Raama or Lord Vishnu". I don't understand how this reduces supremacy of Vishnu? What a meaningless logic. Rama was born with ignorance to kill Ravana. That is his leela. I'm basically an Advaitin. Giving vague statements such as "many of the so called scholars of advaita and some shaiva and many Vaishnava scholars" doesn't make it unanimous.

user131058

Also, I told you there umpteen references in Vedas, ithihasas, Puranas where based on context other deities are also referred as Maheswara, Iswara, Mahadeva, Brahman, Para Brahman etc So, In general these words

The Destroyer

@Krishna but i take stand of Shaivite when i talk to hardcore Vasihavas.

user131058

6:32 AM

@Tezz - So do you take stand of hard core Vaishnava when talking to harcore shaivas? Well you will never do and go soft...anyway that doesn't matter

The Destroyer

@Krishna Why do you refer Tezz?

@Krishna Still now i haven't come across an hardcore Shaivaite on this site. I may take that stand if he demean Vishnu and most importantly if he interprets things to satisfy his whims.

user131058

@The Destroyer - I was discussing with Tezz.

The Destroyer

@Krishna I was the one who asked those questions

user131058

@The Destroyer - SlYou didn't come across a hardcore shaiva. Well, this shows you are biased. There so many people who demean and belittle Vishnu. But, you won't see that because you are not a advaitin but more a shaiva...

The Destroyer

@Krishna I will stop this discussion with this. if Rama worships Vishnu, that doesn't demean Vishnu at all. They are playing their leela.

@Krishna Who are they? where did they belittle? Please don't give vague statements. Give proper proofs

@Krishna As far as i know, most of the people here whom look like Shivas are Advaitins but they have Shiva as Ista Deva. Me and Tezz have Shiva as Ista Deva but believe Advaita as true

sorry Rama worships Shiva*

user131058

6:40 AM

@The Destroyer - I was answering to Text as it is clear that he had put a few questions. What nonsense are you talking?. I never said it demeans. You ant read English. Just read the posts. Unfortunate that you try to be in garb of advaitin...

The Destroyer

@Krishna You start non sense and you later give some vague statements to prove your non sense. I was the one who asked you questions. read properly. I asked you about allegations and Scholars and you mentioned tezz.

Tezz

@Krishna omg... what are you talking... when I told about allegations and being hardcore Shaivite...

The Destroyer

@Krishna It's purely waste of time to take debate with you who don't have proper evidences to prove that Mahadeva mentioned is not SHiva. Bye!

user131058

@The Destroyer - Raama worshipped Siva or not is not question here? Whether Valmiki Ramayana refers to it or not is the question. I am not saying anything about your ista devatas. Just because you shout. It is clear that you don't understand English. The unanimity question was your's but all the previous discussion was with Tezz. You do get infuriated for no reason. Anyway, it waste to discuss with you especially. You don't have basic decorum to how even to discuss.

Tezz

@Krishna when did I talk abou allegations?..

@Krishna and when did I say this here "I am calling you shaiva the as you are yourself saying that you are talking from Shaiva side"

user131058

7:25 AM

@Tezz - I am sorry that I mistook the comments from the user as your's. Sorry about that. As the discussion was between you and me, I missed that it was from another use. Pls ignore those comments

Tezz

7:42 AM

@Krishna hehe... it's ok...

Transcript for

Discussion on answer by The Destroyer…