Jai Srimannarayana,
Om Asmad Gurubhyo: namaha. For the benefit of Sriman ‘Anand Srinivasan Narasimhan’ who posed the question on Lord Rama worshipping ‘Mahadeva’, I am attaching the answer, that Sri Swamiji gave about two years back.
Please read it completely.
Jai Srimannarayana!
According to Sri va:lmi:ki Ra:ma:yana, there is no mention about Sri:ra:ma’s worship to Lord Siva. Lord Siva appeared before Sri:ra:ma, after the death of Ra:vana, along with all the other De:vathas. And then Lord Siva praised Sri:ra:ma as the Ultimate Supreme Lord to all the Ji:vas. And there only, he suggested Sri:ra:ma to go back to Ayo:dhya and bless
the Bharatha and others for some time and come back to the Divine abode, when all the De:vathas requested Sri:ra:ma to come back to Divine Abode, because Ra:vana was killed. This shows the concern that Lord Siva has towards the Lord. That is all mentioned about him. It was Tulasi Das who made somany inter-polations about other dieties and also he made his own story about Srira:ma in his Ra:macharitha Ma:nasa book. He is the one who made the story of Ra:me:swaram in his book. But it is not authentic sofar as Ra:ma’s history is concerned.
We always treat Sri RA:MA:YANA as our ancient history and not just an epic or a pura:na. History means ‘that has to be accepted as it is without any changes or additions’. Sri RA:MA:YANA & SRIMATH MAHA:BHA:RATHA are our historic books, but not pura:na:s or epics. Sri Tulasidas also made mistakes in this regard. This made so many people to think about
Srira:ma’s worship to Lord Siva.
There is one place in Va:lmi:ki Ra:ma:yana, where the name”Maha:de:vaha” mentioned. People give the meaning to that word as Lord Siva, which is wrong there. The context is ‘Ra:ma returning from Lanka in the Pushpaka Vima:nam, along with Sitha and other subjects. Sri Ra:ma was explaining the events and places to Sitha from the areal view. While crossing
the Ocean, He was showing the bridge, constructed by the Va:naras and said how that was built and so on. When the flight reached the other end of the Sea, then He said “Athra pu:rvam Maha:de:vah prasadam akaro:th Prabhuhu” it means “O Sitha! when we wanted to cross the ocean, it was here only, Maha:de:vah= The God of Sea, Varunade:va, appeared and blessed us with the means as and how can we build the bridge”. Here the word Maha:de:vah is wrongly interpreted by somany. In fact, there was no Siva appeared during their sojourn to Lanka.
Some people say that after killing the Ra:vana, Ra:ma was possessed by Brahma Hatya Dosha ( A greater sin captures by killing a brahmin)and to get rid of that sin he consecrated the Siva Linga at Ra:me:swaram. This is again a false story created without any authority. If Ra:ma is captured by the sin, by killing a Demon, who did all non-sense, then no one
will dare to punish wicked. By punishing a wicked person, no one will be captured by sins. And Ra:ma never felt sorry for killing Ra:vana and He never wanted to do any Pra:yaschitta (purification act) for that act.
You may read Sri Va:lmi:ki Ra:ma:yana, whenever it is possible. You can take it granted any event, which goes in accordance with that only. If something goes against to that you need not ask anybody and think it is a story created by the writer according to his own wish.
=chinnajeeyar=
Jai Srimannarayana My humble pranāms at the lotus feet of His Holiness Swamiji.
Awaiting Swamiji’s reply for your submission.
-Team Acharya
How can we interpret this वरदानं महेन्द्रेण ब्रह्मणा वरुणेन च |
महादेवप्रसादाच्च पित्रा मम समागमम् || ६-१२५-११
One might argue that since both Varuṇa and Mahādeva are mentioned here, the previous explanation is false because “Jala” (water) is Varuṇa. The argument can be presented as follows:
My respectful salutations to Srila Sri Sri Chinnajeeyar swamigal,
With great respects to Sri Sri Sri Chinnajeeyar Swamigal, I would like to comment as below:
Manu scriptures mentions about Brahmahathi Dosham and its remedy. Lord Rama, as human being, never showed the Godly powers and as human being, he went on searching for Sitha devi, for instance. Had he behaved as God, he would have known all events and onsequences, which was never manifested in his avatar. He underwent all hardships as human prince /king and showed us unblemish character and values throughout his life span. There is every possibility that as human being, Lord Rama would have worshiped Lord Shiva for Brahmahathi Dosham to show the human race that even the God is not exempted from rules of scriptures.
According to the Ramanathaswamy Temple (ramesswaram ) priets, Rama, who is the seventh avatar of the god Vishnu, prayed to the god Shiva to absolve him of the sin of killing a Brahmin committed during the war against the Rakshasa king Ravana (who was a brahmin, son of a vedic rishi) in Sri Lanka. Rama wanted to have a large lingam to worship Shiva. He directed Hanuman, the lieutenant in his army, to bring a lingam from the Himalayas. When Hanuman was delayed in bringing the lingam, devi Sita built a small lingam out of the sand available in the seashore, which is believed to be the lingam in the sanctum. Since the said Lingam was made up of sand,no abhishekam is done to the lingam and all other poojas are performed. Lord Shiva in the temple is named after Lord Rama, as Rama-natha swamy.
Shall we think that Saint Tulsidas ( 15th Century) who had visions(darshan) of Lord Hamuman and Lord Rama many times in his life time, might have lied about Rama worshipping Lord Shiva at Rameswaram shore? Prudent devotees cannot think otherwise. Lord Rama never did magical or super-human incidents in his avatar, whereas Lord Krishna had shown himself as God in many incidents in Mahabharat. I do not know how other saints /pandits who came after Saint Tulsidas did not raise this question. I may be ignorant. Please advice in his regard.