Why Do Hindus Wear the Tuft of Hair Called Shikha

[prasad1]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp Email Share Link

You have the habit of nagging members when they post such threads for info.

London Swaminathan was one of our esteemed member who worked with Indian Express , and posted many Threads for the Information of many interested members, You along with another member used to post nagging replies to his Threads and now the Forum has lost him.

Occasionally you post some nagging replies to some of my threads as if i will stop posting such threads in this Forum; I am not posting such threads FOR YOU TO READ, but i Post such threads for many members who appreciate my Posting.

Nowadays one more member posts some nagging Replies to my Threads, but i never reply to that member.

IF YOU DO NOT WANT TO READ ANY OF MY THREAD< PLEASE DO NOT READ AND PLEASE NEVER POST YOUR NAGGING REPLIES TO ME BECAUSE I WILL JUST IGNORE YOUR REPLIES AND WILL NOT REPLY TO YOU.

YOU ARE NOT WORTH REPLYING

There is a big difference between PJji and his post. If you do not understand that then I can not help you. I am not against PJji but I question the post.

There was, once upon a time, a great sage of ancient India. His name was Vajashravasa. He performed once a sacrifice in which he was required to give away all his worldly possessions. His young son Nachiketa saw that the cows given away were all who had, 'eaten-their-last-grass' and would hardly be of any use to who received them as gifts. He perceived sheer hypocrisy in such a charity. Feeling disturbed by the inappropriateness of his father's actions, Nachiketa asks to whom was the great saint giving him away since he too was a ‘possession’ of Vajashravasa and hence, needed to be given away. The sage ignores him twice, but on third asking, the irritated sage said in a burst of anger, "Unto Yama, the God of Death I'll give thee."
- See more at: Nachiketa Story by H.N. Bali

Just because I ask some uncomfortable question, you do not banish me. And please do not play the victim card. You have asked uncomfortable question s of other members, and you have chased people from this site before.
You might have a "jalara" now but that alone is not enough.

 

[JR]

There is a big difference between PJji and his post. If you do not understand that then I can not help you. I am not against PJji but I question the post.



Just because I ask some uncomfortable question, you do not banish me. And please do not play the victim card. You have asked uncomfortable question s of other members, and you have chased people from this site before.
You might have a "jalara" now but that alone is not enough.

Namaste Prasad ji,

I still do not see a point in what you are trying to convey! Are you saying keeping Shika is wrong? You have asked PJ ji whether his children kept Shika - Same thing can be asked of you - Have you encountered anyone who kept Shika in real life to tell that since women and widows are not allowed to keep it, it is wrong to keep it?

In god's world, everyone is provided some means to reach up to him, only if they so wanted it. Women and widows are not rendered provision-less to reach up to him. They reach him by serving others. It is just that Shika is practiced still widely by many, especially purohits and this OP discusses the belief that is underneath keeping it -- which is an informative post. I am sure PJ ji would write also about others' means of attaining the lord, if he hasn't already.

The lord is pleased with those who serve him by keeping Shika over their body image and beauty that he grants mukthi to them or higher birth via pulling the soul out of Sahasrara Chakra. What is wrong with this notion? Like I said, others have other means to reach the Lord.

Finally, if you are entitled to post your view, those who like the OP are entitled to post their views too. Calling anyone a 'Jalara', etc, is unbecoming of anyone to say!

Pranam.

 

[prasad1]

Namaste Prasad ji,

I still do not see a point in what you are trying to convey! Are you saying keeping Shika is wrong? You have asked PJ ji whether his children kept Shika - Same thing can be asked of you - Have you encountered anyone who kept Shika in real life to tell that since women and widows are not allowed to keep it, it is wrong to keep it?

In god's world, everyone is provided some means to reach up to him, only if they so wanted it. Women and widows are not rendered provision-less to reach up to him. They reach him by serving others. It is just that Shika is practiced still widely by many, especially purohits and this OP discusses the belief that is underneath keeping it -- which is an informative post. I am sure PJ ji would write also about others' means of attaining the lord, if he hasn't already.

The lord is pleased with those who serve him by keeping Shika over their body image and beauty that he grants mukthi to them or higher birth via pulling the soul out of Sahasrara Chakra. What is wrong with this notion? Like I said, others have other means to reach the Lord.

Finally, if you are entitled to post your view, those who like the OP are entitled to post their views too. Calling anyone a 'Jalara', etc, is unbecoming of anyone to say!

Pranam.

May be I did not explain well. I am not against any fashion statement. I see people sporting Mohawk all the time, I see also people sporting colored hairs.
I do not have any problem with that. But when you say that;

When a devotee leaves his body Krishna pulls the soul from the top most chakra which is on the head under the shikha

It means that those who do not have shikha are not going to be saved by Krishna. Knowing the Caste discrimination imposed on others, this post is insensitive. If the reference to caste requirement and this requirement of shikha for Krishna to pull the soul is not right. If these reference had been deleted I would have chalked it to a yersyear fashion statement and left it alone.
When you identify "your" group of people who are the only "chosen ones", then I have problem with that statement.

 

[Raji Ram]

............ 1. What seemed funny to me, in the OP was about Krishna deputising for Yama and pulling the soul, etc. What, then happens to people who are not Krishna devotees as also those who do not wear a tuft?

2. All said and done why is it that even orthodox brahmins do not like to sport a mostly shaven head with a tuft: are they afraid of the unmentionable tearing out the tuft instead of their soul?!

1. Obviously, this way to 'take away the soul' is ONLY for the devotees of Krishna. For others, there will be some other method!

2. When a pooNool can invite attack from miscreants, how will othordox brahmins be brave enough to sport a tuft on a shaven head?

 

[Raji Ram]

........ When you identify "your" group of people who are the only "chosen ones", then I have problem with that statement.

Prasad Sir!

The picture shows a Vaishnavite with shikaa and hence the blog will be about how Krishna will save such people.

Others will be 'chosen' by their OWN Gods / Goddesses. Not to worry!

P.S: P J Sir is trying to 'educate' our members by posting blogs written by others. That is it!

 

[Raji Ram]

Bhaktha Markandeya:

Courtesy: Google images

 

[Vaagmi]

Prasad Sir!

The picture shows a Vaishnavite with shikaa and hence the blog will be about how Krishna will save such people.

Others will be 'chosen' by their OWN Gods / Goddesses. Not to worry!

P.S: P J Sir is trying to 'educate' our members by posting blogs written by others. That is it!

Yes, like the picture in post #29--Siva pulling the shika of Markandeya while Yama looks on helplessly. LOL.

 

[Vaagmi]

When a devotee leaves his body Krishna pulls the soul from the top most chakra which is on the head under the shikha

It means that those who do not have shikha are not going to be saved by Krishna. Knowing the Caste discrimination imposed on others, this post is insensitive. If the reference to caste requirement and this requirement of shikha for Krishna to pull the soul is not right. If these reference had been deleted I would have chalked it to a yersyear fashion statement and left it alone.
When you identify "your" group of people who are the only "chosen ones", then I have problem with that statement.

The OP just states that the soul is pulled out by Srikrishna and not that the shikha is pulled out. Read carefully again. The top most chakra just happens to lie below the shikha because the hairs have grown over that particular spot. It is not said that the chakra hides in the bushy shikha and so Krishna pulls the shikha which is grown by three varnas (like Hanuman who did not want to waste time looking for the life saving aushadhi lying in the thick growth of sanjivini parvat). Where is the caste requirement in all this? In yoga shastra it is said that the soul(Atma)-just the Atma irrespective of caste creed etc,- which reaches the top most chakra lying below the skull leaves the body through an orifice called brahmarantram and that hole lies under the shikha sported by humans. As Sangomji said the shikha was not even exclusive to brahmins and the higher varnas. Even shudras used to sport shikha. In fact the shikha was considered to be a feature which made a male look handsome and desirable (SRK sports a shikha. LOL). Alwar speaks about the மைவண்ண நறுங்குஞ்சி (the dark tuft on the head of Sri Krishna) which enchanted him no end. And, to boot, Krishna was a Yadava at that relevant time. Krishna here represents just God and so there is no need to take potshots at vaishnavites.

So those armchair revolutionaries who wait for the smallest provocation to their revolutionary fervor to fight for the downtrodden and non-vaishnavites should wait untill they get another real opportunity. This has proved to be a false alarm. They can go and have a chilled coca cola to cool down their vocal chords as well their frayed tempers. மறக்காமல் முகத்தில் வழியும் அசடையும் துடைத்துக்கொள்ளவும். LOL.

 

[Raji Ram]

Yes, like the picture in post #29--Siva pulling the shika of Markandeya while Yama looks on helplessly. LOL.

OMG! You need to visit your ophthalmologist, Vaagmi Sir!

Two reasons:

1. The picture is in post # 31.

2. Lord Shiva is NOT pulling his bhaktha's shikhA!

 

[P.J.]

P.S: P J Sir is trying to 'educate' our members by posting blogs written by others. That is it!

I am not trying to educate anyone here, I am just sharing an info.


These persons posted nagging replies to Sri London Swaminathan when he was posting many informative Posts, which shows these persons never change.

 

[Raji Ram]

I am not trying to educate anyone here, I am just sharing an info.


These persons posted nagging replies to Sri London Swaminathan when he was posting many informative Posts, which shows these persons never change.

I we share info. in a public forum, members will post their views in either way:

So we can NOT expect :clap2: always!

 

[sarang]

Please continue to write. It is a self learning and sharing what is learnt. People with sickular mindset will never change, wherever they domicile.

Our knowledge base is so vast and varied that we need several births to learn a part of it.

I am not trying to educate anyone here, I am just sharing an info.


These persons posted nagging replies to Sri London Swaminathan when he was posting many informative Posts, which shows these persons never change.

 

[Vaagmi]

OMG! You need to visit your ophthalmologist, Vaagmi Sir!

Two reasons:

1. The picture is in post # 31.

2. Lord Shiva is NOT pulling his bhaktha's shikhA!

Reason 1 accepted. It was a mistake overlooked.

Reason 2 not accepted. siva appears to be just about to pull and even yank. You do not gather and hold a lock of hair for other purposes. LOL.

 

[CHANDRU1849]

From whatever sources I have read so far, Sikha or tuft was compulsory for the three upper Varnas while it was not disallowed for the Sudras.

Yes. A famous politician from Isai Vellalar community had tuft when he was young.

 

[P.J.]

Please continue to write. It is a self learning and sharing what is learnt. People with sickular mindset will never change, wherever they domicile.

Our knowledge base is so vast and varied that we need several births to learn a part of it.

Thanks Sri sarang Sir

 

[Janaki Jambunathan]

I am not trying to educate anyone here, I am just sharing an info.


These persons posted nagging replies to Sri London Swaminathan when he was posting many informative Posts, which shows these persons never change.

Need not be from London - Kudumi is ever facinting!

Remember school day rhyme!

Delhi Bombay Calcutta

Kudumiya pidichu izukatta!

 

[auh]

OMG, I have to reply to this

Why Do Hindus Wear the Tuft of Hair Called Shikha
It is an established rule that anyone who recites Vedic mantras should not have hair on face and head. So, those who need to perform Vedic rituals are advised to remove their hair.

So, all the pics that depict rishis with flowing beards are wrong then.

The shika covers that part of the skull wherein lies the final chakra – the Shasrara Chakra. He retains the hair to protect it. Then the question would arise, why shave of the rest of his head?

One of the main rituals of the brahmin’s practice is the Surya Vandana, and Sandya Vandana. It is believed that the sun is the primary source of clean energy not just to the physique, but also to the mind. He wants the uninterrupted rays of the sun to fall on his brain and soak in. (Remember, hair, like our nails, is dead matter.) He stands in the sun three times a day to pray, chant his mantras and meditate – facing the sun.

The question that now arises is, why does the brahmin not want the "primary source of clean energy not just to the physique, but also to the mind" to fall on the most important chakra, aka the Sahasrara?

However, there are many reasons for having Shikha:

We'll see them one by one

1.) When a devotee leaves his body Krishna pulls the soul from the top most chakra which is on the head under the shikha.

So? How is this a reason for having a Shikha?

2.) It is said that according to the karma of a soul, the living entity at the time of death leaves the body from different places, from mouth, nose, etc… But a devotee who leaves this body from that chakra (sahasrara at the shikha) attains high planets of the Spiritual world.

Ok, still how does this connect to the "reason for having a Shikha"?

3.) Also hair is needed to protect that chakra. Women do not cut their hair, because their other lower chakras are not protected well, but if they have long hair they protect them with their hair.

Hair, in most of the cases, grows on the head by itself, even without a Shikha! (yawn) Still waiting for the reason to have a Shikha.

4.) The mayavadis follow the ascending path since they egotistically confident of achieve God and coming out of illusion by the dint of their insignificant efforts or sadhana. So they do not keep a shikha because they do not need the mercy of the Lord.

Ok, so here is the first reason - keep a Shikha if you want the mercy of the Lord! The statement is self-explanatory, and does not require my comments

5.) Shikha is also like a spiritual antenna on the top of the head meant to show to the Lord and that we are aspiring recipients of His causeless mercy.

If we do not keep a Shikha, would God be confused to find out who, among us, are the real aspiring recipients of "His causeless mercy"?

6.) One must have a sikha to perform any kind of yajna. Therefore in Indian tradition all the brahmanas, Vaisnava or otherwise, keep a sikha. Although there seem to be no sastric injunctions regarding the size of the sikha, Gaudiya Vaisnavas traditionally keep the sikha about the size of a calf’s hoofprint, approximately 1.5 inches (5 – 6 cm.) in diameter.

Supporting please?

7.) Srila Prabhupada mentioned this in a conversation with some of his disciples in Hawaii (6.5.1972): “Gaudiya Vaishnava shikha is an inch and a half across — no bigger. Bigger shikha means another sampradaya…. And they have to be knotted.”

Bring out the scales and vernier calipers...

8.) The shikha may be any length, but it should be kept tightly knotted and only untied when you are washing, The Hari Bhakti Vilasa observes that members of the upper classes even tie the sikha before taking the final ablutions of a bath. This particularly applies when bathing in a body of water such as a river or a lake, in which case to not tie the shikha prior to bathing is considered low class and disrespectful to the sacred rite of bathing.

You may tie it in a simple manner for bathing, retying it more carefully after the bath. Also, when going to sleep, attending funeral rites, or observing a period of mourning, you should keep the shikha untied. Since an untied shikha is a sign of a death in the family, it is inauspicious to go about one’s daily duties with an untied shikha. It is also said that if one keeps the shikha untied, the body may become weak.
While tying your sikha after bathing, chant the Hare Krishna mantra, or, if initiated with Gayatri mantras, silently chant the Brahma-gayatri (first line of Gayatri). The shikha should not be braided (traditionally only women braid their hair), nor should it be kept long and disheveled. Naturally, if the shikha is too short to be tied, it is all right to leave it open, but it should not be disheveled.

Phew, heavy technical stuff.

9.) Significance of Shaving head – It is a symbol of renunciation. If you see materialists, they are extremely fond of hair. Decorating hair etc pulls us into bodily consciousness. This is not good for practicing spiritualists. So as an indication of renunciation from material consciousness devotees shave head.

Wait! we are discussing reasons for having a Shikha, not shaved head.

10.) Significance of shikha – Another view: It is a symbol of duality of souls and supreme Lord. Impersonalists believe that there is no duality between the supreme and the living entity and they are expected to shave their heads completely. Vaishnavites believe in the philosophy that there is clear and eternal distinction between supreme god Krishna and living entities. The shikha is symbol of Krishna which is large and the remaining very little hair is the symbol of insignificant and innumerable conditioned living entity

So if you believe in many gods, have a head full of hair.

11.) Scientific Reasons for Having a Shikha:

ah, this should be more logical...

(A) A person who keeps Shikha attracts cosmic energy which imparts enlightment.

Yes, and the amount of enlightenment imparted is inversely proportional to the length of the Shikha.

(B) The small portion of hair that hangs from behind our head applies little pressure on our brains that helps one to improve concentration and mind control and improve memory.

So the Shikha has a direct connection to the brain, via the skull, that it is able to exert pressure on the brain. Pressure on the brain, not the skull. Mind you.

From the time of the Vedas, the shikha was a distinguishing feature of the Brahmins, Kshatriyas and Vaishyas. It signified the ‘twice-born’ or all those Upanayanam has been performed. At the time of Chudakarana, a tuft of hair was left on the head, never to be cut. This shikha covered a large part of the brain. According to Sushruta, the reason that a few tufts are left on the head is that at the crown, an artery joins a critical nerve juncture. Since an injury to this part of the head is believed to be fatal, it was considered necessary to protect the area by keeping a tuft of hair over it. The shikha was a symbol of superiority and of cleanliness.

After all the jokes, here probably is the real reason... jotted down like the fine print of an ipo.

Any religious or auspicious ceremony required the shikha to be tied in a knot. The knot was tied to the accompaniment of the Gayatri Mantra. An untied shikha was a symbol of disgrace, impurity and mourning.

Looks like I forgot to comment on this important reason, and hence the edit. This is probably a reason to tie the Shikha, not a reason, scientific or otherwise, to have a Shikha.

 

[prasad1]

OMG, I have to reply to this

So, all the pics that depict rishis with flowing beards are wrong then.

The question that now arises is, why does the brahmin not want the "primary source of clean energy not just to the physique, but also to the mind" to fall on the most important chakra, aka the Sahasrara?
We'll see them one by one

So? How is this a reason for having a Shikha?


Ok, still how does this connect to the "reason for having a Shikha"?

Hair, in most of the cases, grows on the head by itself, even without a Shikha! (yawn) Still waiting for the reason to have a Shikha.
Ok, so here is the first reason - keep a Shikha if you want the mercy of the Lord! The statement is self-explanatory, and does not require my comments

If we do not keep a Shikha, would God be confused to find out who, among us, are the real aspiring recipients of "His causeless mercy"?

Supporting please?

Bring out the scales and vernier calipers...

Phew, heavy technical stuff.

Wait! we are discussing reasons for having a Shikha, not shaved head.

So if you believe in many gods, have a head full of hair.

ah, this should be more logical...

Yes, and the amount of enlightenment imparted is inversely proportional to the length of the Shikha.
So the Shikha has a direct connection to the brain, via the skull, that it is able to exert pressure on the brain. Pressure on the brain, not the skull. Mind you.


After all the jokes, here probably is the real reason... jotted down like the fine print of an ipo.



Looks like I forgot to comment on this important reason, and hence the edit. This is probably a reason to tie the Shikha, not a reason, scientific or otherwise, to have a Shikha.

Thank you for the detailed and very specific points made in your post.
Information is useful only when it is correct and with references, otherwise it is just misinformation.
Thank you Auhji.

 

[JR]

I we share info. in a public forum, members will post their views in either way:

So we can NOT expect :clap2: always!

Not necessarily, anyone who posts information expects criticism but not undue criticism! Undue criticism is against the spirit of posting.

It goes to the extent of undue criticism if there are personal attacks like:

i) Asking if the OP has his children don a shika.

ii) Saying that the OP is a very different man from his posts, etc. This is judging someone personally.

 

[prasad1]

Who decides what is due and undue?
What happens when you post irreverent information as if it is from scriptures with out any references.
A post with 99% accurate information, but hurtful message included in it. We have every right to post from other sites, but you must edit out hurtful or incorrect information (exception is quoted text).

 

[JR]

FYI: I updated reply #44 to be more specific as to what meant 'undue criticism'.

 

[prasad1]

FYI: I updated reply #44 to be more specific as to what meant 'undue criticism'.

You still misunderstand me.
I mean a criticism of a post does not mean criticism of the poster. A post does not define an individual. The individual can have various opinion about the same topic. So My post said that i was against the post and not against the poster. Asking a personal question is not personal attack. When you come out and advice others how to live your life I have every reason to ask how you did in your personal life.

 

[csviswanath]

Dear PJ Sir thanks for such an informative post.

 

[a-TB]

You still misunderstand me.
I mean a criticism of a post does not mean criticism of the poster. A post does not define an individual. The individual can have various opinion about the same topic. So My post said that i was against the post and not against the poster. Asking a personal question is not personal attack. When you come out and advice others how to live your life I have every reason to ask how you did in your personal life.

I agree with the bold part of the above text. Actually asking for clarification of position is also not an attack though Mr Prasad did scold me for asking Mr Vaagmi to explain how he reconciled his position of complete surrender to his God and yet boasted how egotistical he is!
This was in another thread. My thought of pointing this out now is that I think we should not misinterpret and give bad intent on others . Giving benefit of doubt is the best thing in open forums.

By the way Mr Vaagmi feels he did not answer my question to explain his contradictory views. All I can gather is that he was doing something being busy. To quote Mr Vaagmi's own words and I cannot say it any better he perhaps was reminding himself to "மறக்காமல் முகத்தில் வழியும் அசடையும் துடைத்துக்கொள்ளவும். LOL." as he was LOLing

LOL LOL

 

[CHANDRU1849]

OMG! You need to visit your ophthalmologist, Vaagmi Sir!

Two reasons:

1. The picture is in post # 31.

2. Lord Shiva is NOT pulling his bhaktha's shikhA!

Lord Shiva is actually placing his hand on the head of Markandeya to bless him.