Saligrama stone

[sangom]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp Email Share Link

This man is obviously trolling, ignore him. They are not solidified saliva, but, they are indeed fossilized remains of some sort of small creature. I believe Shaligrmams used to be found in the river Ghantaki. But, these days, I am told, they can be found only in the upper origins of the river, a good 4 to 5 days trek even from Muktinath shrine. However, along the way to Muktinath from Jomsom locals sell Shaligramam, but the authenticity is questionable, they could be just stones that look like a shaligramam.

Reading this thread it seems to me that there are misconceptions about Shaligramam even from those who seem to venerate it. First off, it is not a pooja item like dhoopam, deepam, pushpam, etc. Shaligramam is the very object of worship. The pooja items are used to do aradhanai to the shaligramam.

The belief is that Sriman Narayana suo moto takes residence in all shaligramam, as opposed to vigrahas wherein he takes residence only upon proper prana pratishta invocation. While Sriman Narayana is said to leave the vighraha if proper aradhana is interrupted even once, not so with shaligramam. Whether or not worship is continued shaligramam is believed to maintain its divinity. The faithful, of course, do not want to see aradhana interrupted even once, so they take the shaligramam even when they travel -- placing it in a bowl of rice is done, but not desirable. If it gets interrupted due to unavoidable reasons, like theettu and no Brahmin male post upanayanam and samasrayanam was available to do the aradhanai, then, when aradhanai is resumed after the teettu is over thirumanjanam (abhishekam) with milk is to be performed. All this means the shaligramam is not just a stone or a fossil to believers, it is God who has made his abode in these objects out of his supposed infinite compassion to make it easy for the sinful souls to worship him.

It is true that proper “madi” needs to be maintained, but then that is not a special requirement only if you do Shaligramam worship, a Brahmin is supposed to maintain “madi” no matter what. This, of course, is impossible unless you have an outhouse separated from the main house where the women can spend their days of rajaswala, if they remain under the same roof, all the great Neptune's ocean cannot get you Madi.

It is true that girl’s parents present shaligramam to the new mappillai, but it is not dowry, and it can never be two shaligramams, the proper count is 1, 4, 6, ....

Dear Shri Nara,

Thank you for the authentic info. I have doubts on a few points.

However, along the way to Muktinath from Jomsom locals sell Shaligramam, but the authenticity is questionable, they could be just stones that look like a shaligramam.

I was told that these locals bring smoothened, ovoid black stones found in the river bed and palm off such stones as saalagraamams. But the real test is that there will be an opening in any real salagraamam and if water is poured into such "mouth" and measured, it will be found that the quantity is much more than what that mouth can apparently hold, which indicates that the crevice goes deeper. I was even told that if a very fine metal thread is passed through this hole it will go much farther than the apparent portions. Saalagramams without such a "mouth" are considered as "madhyamam" only.

Are these true?

This, of course, is impossible unless you have an outhouse separated from the main house where the women can spend their days of rajaswala, if they remain under the same roof, all the great Neptune's ocean cannot get you Madi.

What I have heard is that a separate room with a separate door, need not be separated from the main house, is sufficient and the woman should not use the normal door for entry into the house till she takes bath on the fifth day. But is a "separate" outhouse required according to srivaishnava beliefs?

 

[auh]

What I have heard is that a separate room with a separate door, need not be separated from the main house, is sufficient and the woman should not use the normal door for entry into the house till she takes bath on the fifth day. But is a "separate" outhouse required according to srivaishnava beliefs?

The Agraharam type houses (long & winding) had no separate rooms outside the roof, and one "rezhi" was used for the women to rest. This I observed as I grew up.

I had SV friends (orthodox) where again the separate roof was not required, but again, we discard some and use some.

 

[Nara]

With asirvadam at one end and know all ex vaishnava at the other end, life is jingalala!

Brahmins too are becoming clever; they do what their gurus and acharyas approve. All born brahmins may not get 100% marks, but many get the golden median. Practising brahmins can and will decide what is necessary and sufficient. They will support and eulogize and respect and follow those worth following.

Why so much animosity dear brother Sarang? Have I said anything critical? Why can't you even bear to address me directly when you make comments about me? We can be friends even if we have deep disagreements, that is what makes life interesting. I offer my hand in friendship and I hope you will take it.

Cheers, Dileepan

 

[sangom]

Why so much animosity dear brother Sarang? Have I said anything critical? Why can't you even bear to address me directly when you make comments about me? We can be friends even if we have deep disagreements, that is what makes life interesting. I offer my hand in friendship and I hope you will take it.

Cheers, Dileepan

My salutations to you, dear Dileepan, though you are younger in age!

I also felt the same way about Shri Sarang's post. But then I thought that perhaps he is not a tabra, nor even a hindu, but a Muslim trolling here successfully, ubidentified, because, he knows many things about hinduism.

As a muslim, it is but natural that he believes you are a worst (read, atheistic) "kaffir" and by throwing stones at you, he earns merit before Allaah.

I left it at that.

 

[Nara]

...... But the real test is that there will be an opening in any real salagraamam and if water is poured into such "mouth" and measured, it will be found that the quantity is much more than what that mouth can apparently hold, which indicates that the crevice goes deeper. I was even told that if a very fine metal thread is passed through this hole it will go much farther than the apparent portions. Saalagramams without such a "mouth" are considered as "madhyamam" only.

Dear Shri sangom, this "mouth" is called vadanam. As you have mentioned there are saligramams without vadanam and as you have observed these are "lesser" even though if you have one of these it must be worshipped just the same way as one with vadanam.

The testing procedure you have cited may be true, I am not sure, but it makes sense.

What I have heard is that a separate room with a separate door, need not be separated from the main house, is sufficient and the woman should not use the normal door for entry into the house till she takes bath on the fifth day. But is a "separate" outhouse required according to srivaishnava beliefs?

SVs do not have separate beliefs on these counts, they are the same as smarthas. As with smarthas many changes have been adopted with the guidance of elders, gurus, and acharyas as brother sarang has already pointed out. These days anything goes. Even the most orthodox live in flat systems and there is no way to observe the strict rules.

As for number of days, what I have heard is 4th day, after bath she can enter the household, but cannot assist in cooking. She can accept perumaL theertham, but not satari. On the fifth day all is fine. There are many more crazy rules but those are for another time.

best ....

 

[sangom]

The Agraharam type houses (long & winding) had no separate rooms outside the roof, and one "rezhi" was used for the women to rest. This I observed as I grew up.

I had SV friends (orthodox) where again the separate roof was not required, but again, we discard some and use some.

You r right auh. The rich agrahaarees of some of the villages like sundarapandiapuram (KK dt.) have very large houses, each having a side lane entrance leading to a kind of outhouse-type room for menstruating women. These women have to use this by-lane to go to the pond for bath and re-enter the house through proper door only after the asuddhi or theeNDal is gone, after the bath.

The less rich brahmin agraharams like in TVPM, had a "koTTil" known as "dooramanA koTTil" at the back of the house from where they used a narrow lane at the back of the street. This lane was used by the (manual) scavenger also, in the olden days and was called "thOTTi vazhi".

 

[prasad1]

It is fascinating to watch old men in this site talking about women, her dress, or her body parts. It is like clockwork that these senile men want to control women in some form or other. They should see that very shortly it is not going to matter, as they will be turned to ash or dirt.

Ye old men accept that life has gone by, you are stranded in history. Your repeated attacks on women's liberation is not going to reverse the changing norms of the society. In the present world of city life, with indoor plumbing, sanitary napkins there is no need to banish women to outhouse (and gloat over it).

 

[Nara]

.....Ye old men accept that life has gone by, you are stranded in history. Your repeated attacks on women's liberation.......

prasad1, as one of these senile old men, let me assure you that talking about the Brahminical rules that govern the lives of women who are unfortunate enough to live in those circumstances is not an endorsement of them and neither is it an attack on women's liberation. I for one reject these anachronistic rules. As for women's liberation, I am all for it, a little less testosterone in high places is a good thing, a world run by women instead of egotistic men would surely be a much better place....

 

[kkumar29]

Shri Nara,

I completely endorse and agree with your statement:thumb:

K. Kumar

 

[sangom]

It is fascinating to watch old men in this site talking about women, her dress, or her body parts. It is like clockwork that these senile men want to control women in some form or other. They should see that very shortly it is not going to matter, as they will be turned to ash or dirt.

Ye old men accept that life has gone by, you are stranded in history. Your repeated attacks on women's liberation is not going to reverse the changing norms of the society. In the present world of city life, with indoor plumbing, sanitary napkins there is no need to banish women to outhouse (and gloat over it).

Shri Prasad,

All of us "Ye old men" in this forum at least, know very well that we are all not going to be chiranjeevis; yes, much of life has gone by for all of us and only some negligible part is left. But, we were not inanimate objects and each one of us has arrived at certain conclusions as a cumulative and aggregate result of our varied experiences in life. For example Shri Dileepan has become an atheist from being a staunch Srivaishnava, and I have become an agnostic from being an ordinary tabra.

That apart, going by your own principle of individual freedom concept, can we not have the liberty to hold our own views? Shri Praveen has given the freedom to express differing kinds of views in this forum.

As regards women's liberation and equality, there is generally no difference of opinion; only when the equality concept goes beyond equality, there are practical problems. Just think of a world run by women and how it will be, if you can make that mental exercise or otherwise pray to live long in that all-woman world. I for one am of the considered view that women must have equality within the home and not beyond that.

 

[auh]

It is fascinating to watch old men in this site talking about women, her dress, or her body parts. It is like clockwork that these senile men want to control women in some form or other. They should see that very shortly it is not going to matter, as they will be turned to ash or dirt.

Ye old men accept that life has gone by, you are stranded in history. Your repeated attacks on women's liberation is not going to reverse the changing norms of the society. In the present world of city life, with indoor plumbing, sanitary napkins there is no need to banish women to outhouse (and gloat over it).

Though not an old man myself, I cannot digest this post for it is full of presumptions. May I gently remind you, that love itself is a form of control mechanism. Would you prefer a society that is unstructured and given to whims and fashions or a society that is structured (loosely or otherwise)? (Leave the ambit of religion aside) Any organized structure requires some form of control, I think.

 

[tks]

Shri Prasad,

I for one am of the considered view that women must have equality within the home and not beyond that.

I am trying to understand your considered view - what inequality do you prescribe for women outside home?

 

[prasad1]

Though not an old man myself, I cannot digest this post for it is full of presumptions. May I gently remind you, that love itself is a form of control mechanism. Would you prefer a society that is unstructured and given to whims and fashions or a society that is structured (loosely or otherwise)? (Leave the ambit of religion aside) Any organized structure requires some form of control, I think.

Sir, welcome to the forum.
You might be young in years........
The attitude still is to control women, or someone else say ........
In democratic world you need to be able to give up that desire to control, as everyone wants some of it. If you think you can control the weaker section because you have physical strength, financial might, or superior birth, those days are numbered. When you are eating Amma's dirt do not think you will be able to control your little girl.
You need organized structure in a Military or other regimented organization, it might be more efficient too, but people are not going to accept it. With education, financial freedom, and urban life style, the old days are not coming back any time soon.

 

[Nara]

.... Just think of a world run by women and how it will be, if you can make that mental exercise or otherwise pray to live long in that all-woman world. I for one am of the considered view that women must have equality within the home and not beyond that.

Dear Shri Sangom, as I have already stated I would prefer a world run mostly by women. At the very least such a world can be no worse than what we have now, and I would wager, if I were a betting man, it will be a lot better place.

Further, it is my considered opinion that a society that does not allow equality for women beyond the home can never provide equality at home. The societies where inequality is practiced beyond the threshold of one’s own home are the ones where women enjoy even worse inequality at home. Unfortunately, such societies still exist in this world, such as Saudi Arabia, and I am willing to profess faith in the non-existent god if that is the only way I can avoid living in such a society.

Not practicing equality at home is a matter of mutual agreement, but to allow such discrimination in the public sphere can never be tolerated in a free and liberal society, and that is my considered opinion.

best, Dileepan

 

[KRS]

Folks,

I personally think that there are gender differences, in terms of capabilities. This is why, I am not a great supporter of mixing genders in most of the Sports. Women will lose. We can say the same about fields where women excel, like fine work that is intricate.

'Equality' is a loaded term. It does not mean that men and women carry 'equal' load in all aspects of life. To me this term means that women have as equal a chance a man has to play in the society, in whichever field she chooses to endeavor, of course taking in to consideration the limitations imposed by gender constraints as described above. Same applies to men, and has been a long time in a lot of societies, with sound endorsements. As the society has become open to women to perform work that were once solely performed by men, the 'equality' issue is at hand.

Only women can decide what is 'equality'. If they protest, we know that there is no 'equality'. And we need to listen to that, without imposing our own 'liberated western views on equality'. But the freedom of choice should always be there.

Regards,
KRS

 

[renuka]

As a woman I would not like a world run by all women or run by all men!

It has to be balance of both sexes..most modern women make the mistake of trying to be in charge of everything.

As women the best way is to play smart...it does no harm being the bimbo from time to time cos sometimes when it comes to males...a charming smile and glance can get them to do anything instead of trying to order them to do things.

So you see..the name of the game is to keep males deluded and let them think they are in charge and let them do all the work.

So it is never actually 50% 50% equality in the world....one must know how to be in control of a situation but yet let the male feel as if he is in charge.

It is in the mind of the male that he wants to be in charge(it has something got to do with the testosterone)...so keep the levels high and let him do all the work.

The secret to success is not doing all the work yourself but getting others to do the work for you.


Just a word of caution to women: Never 100% trust a male who seems too good to be true when it comes to gender equality....most of the while a male who likes a women to be 100% in charge is actually lazy! so dont be fooled by them and end up doing all work for them!LOL

 

[sravna]

Dear Renuka,

There is disparateness in the world and also the associated incompleteness in each of the disparate entity because, the need to be co-operative will only then be felt. Of course that truth is not easily learnt but ultimately will be. So men and women have to employ each others talents for the common benefit. If one of them is predominantly in control both are going to lose.

So, I would say that the secret to success of something is everyone doing the part they need to do.

 

[tbs]

Dear Renuka,

There is disparateness in the world because, the need to be co-operative will only then be felt. Of course that truth is not easily learnt but ultimately will be. So men and women have to employ each others talents for the common benefit. If one of them is predominantly in control both are going to lose.

So, I would say that the secret to success of something is everyone doing the part they need to do.

hi sarang.....

nice words....i feel the same way.....

the secret to success of something is everyone doing the part they need to do

the woman is supporter of the family ...not the replacement of husband....the economical freedom is to support the family....

 

[renuka]

Dear Renuka,

There is disparateness in the world because, the need to be co-operative will only then be felt. Of course that truth is not easily learnt but ultimately will be. So men and women have to employ each others talents for the common benefit. If one of them is predominantly in control both are going to lose.

So, I would say that the secret to success is everyone doing the part they need to do.

Dear Sravna,


I had a strong feeling you would respond to my post cos my post does sound like Maya!LOL

Ok back to topic...I do agree with you "the secret to success is everyone doing the part they need to do" but this is only applicable with those who see you as their equal.

In those who try to dominate us like most males...the best way is to play a safe game so that the one who wants to dominate end up doing all the work! Serves them right for trying to be over dominating.

 

[sravna]

Dear Sravna,


I had a strong feeling you would respond to my post cos my post does sound like Maya!LOL

Ok back to topic...I do agree with you "the secret to success is everyone doing the part they need to do" but this is only applicable with those who see you as their equal.

In those who try to dominate us like most males...the best way is to play a safe game so that the one who wants to dominate end up doing all the work! Serves them right for trying to be over dominating.

But Renuka, the only chance of two fitting together is when one of them at least is ready to play the role and be ready for the fit. There is the chance then that things might fall into place. If neither is ready for the fit there is no hope.

 

[auh]

Sir, welcome to the forum.

Thank you. Sir.

The attitude still is to control women, or someone else say ........
When you are eating Amma's dirt do not think you will be able to control your little girl.

I will just highlight on the quoted part from your post.

I may live in a regime of women, but that is of no concern with the points that we are discussing.

What is a not a power game in this world? If we scratch deep down into our hearts, it is only selfish interest that stares back bleakly, and all other emotions stem from this very cause. Dont think that I am painting a depressing picture (I am quite spirited in what I do, at least I think so), but the reality is that we are just inconsequential specks of dust here that no matter what we do, and the only thing that keeps us going is the inherent quality of the mind to explore the unexplored.

I am happy to ignore the philosophies, and live, and enjoy (the pleasures of) living in an all-women-dominated world.

I have nothing more to add value to this discussion.

 

[renuka]

But Renuka, the only chance of two fitting together is when one of them at least is ready to play the role and be ready for the fit. There is the chance then that things might fall into place. If neither is ready for the fit there is no hope.

Dear Sravna,


At home between husband and wife there is no problems if both have similar understanding and over the years of living together we can roughly make out who is good at what..so that way roles are defined and tasks are shared...that is no problem...so gender equality is possible at home.

I am talking mainly about outside of home..at work place etc..where some try to dominate the scene.

I have seen both men and women trying to dominate the scene thinking they do work better than anyone else...it is to these types of individuals that I feel one should not retaliate and let them bask in the glory of their so called "greatness" and let them do all the hard work!

I have noticed that many women at work force want to create impact to show that they are women of substance and end up making life difficult for themselves too in the long run.

I feel a person who is not confident of themselves need to make the biggest show of their capability..same goes for man too.

For me on a personal note when I meet a dominant person of substance type I usually let them feel good..never oppose them and let them take the lead...if someone is dumb enough to think he/she is great...let them think so..just sit back and watch the fun of these Type A personalities.


Like I once had a patient who was disagreeing what ever I was telling her....these types are those who try to show others that they are know it all even though they might actually be ignorant....so for these types I handle them simple..just give them a referral to a specialist hospital where they can keep arguing how much they want when they see their bill...but I have friends who will try to convince the patient to accept their advise and it becomes a power struggle.

For me this is what tell them "well..I heard your points..may be it is better for you to get a second opinion and let me help you by referring you to a private medical center"

Believe me after they get referred and being done every test the very same patient will come back quiet and timid to me..cos they know they can't afford to fork out money becos of their arrogance again!

 

[sravna]

Dear Reunka,

Wouldn't it be better if your patient comes back you not quiet and timid but happy? I think the best way to handle such people is not in their own way. This is because people would have been used to such responses and so it doesn't really have any ameliorating effect on them. In fact it makes them more inured. So I would not look at who says what but what they say. The trick is to not take their words to heart but to respond in a way that doesn't show we are ignoring them. I am sure our responses will be spontaneous and invariably apt.

 

[renuka]

Dear Reunka,

Wouldn't it be better if your patient comes back you not quiet and timid but happy? I think the best way to handle such people is not in their own way. This is because people would have been used to such responses and so it doesn't really have any ameliorating effect on them. In fact it makes them more inured. So I would not look at who says what but what they say. The trick is to not take their words to heart but to respond in a way that doesn't show we are ignoring them. I am sure our responses will be spontaneous and invariably apt.

Dear Sravna,

There are many types of people in this world..I do not take anything to heart but when we are dealing with difficult persons after they have met their "match" only then they "behave".

So let them feel they are right and high and mighty till they realize that they need to tone down.

Just like in movies we see a Don will be acting high and mighty till he meets his match..so you see I don't want to be rectifying anyone or convincing anyone in day to day life...I rather let someone else do it.


A person who like to be in charge will like to rectify and control the situation and also may be exert power to a certain extent..but to me if you ask me I wont waste my time trying to control others...its a total waste of energy.

 

[sravna]

Dear Sravna,

There are many types of people in this world..I do not take anything to heart but when we are dealing with difficult persons after they have met their "match" only then they "behave".

So let them feel they are right and high and mighty till they realize that they need to tone down.

Just like in movies we see a Don will be acting high and mighty till he meets his match..so you see I don't want to be rectifying anyone or convincing anyone in day to day life...I rather let someone else do it.


A person who like to be in charge will like to rectify and control the situation and also may be exert power to a certain extent..but to me if you ask me I wont waste my time trying to control others...its a total waste of energy.

Dear Renuka,

Isn't it right that when you try to control others you are not in control of yourself? As you rightly said our energy is not well spent in controlling others but only in controlling self. To make the truculent behave let us do the latter. I guarantee that they would find us more than their match and so will behave