Possessive Shivji

Page

Shiv1234

@Shiv1234

Beginner

Posted: 13 years ago

Hi all,

After todays episode Just wanted everyone to think about Shivji being possessive about Sati...he cudnt tolerate the fact that Sati disguised herself as Lord Ramas wife to test Lord Ram (Lord Vishnu)

Just a thought...

Quote

Created

13years

Last reply

13years

Replies

Views

Users

Likes

Frequent Posters

ramki1

@ramki1

Voyager

Posted: 13 years ago

no...shivji is not possessive...what he was said correct...when Lord Rama searching for seetha suddenly matha Seetha appears and again gone is not good thing it will create pain to Lord Rama

Quote

Looks like you are new here. Register for free, learn and contribute.

Subha

@Life_Is_Dutiful

Stunner

+ 40

Posted: 13 years ago

shiv regarded sita as his mother so when he saw sati in disguise of sita,he got angry as his wife went in disguise of a woman whom he treats as his mother.shiv is not possessive about sati.

Quote

bcbs_srk

@bcbs_srk

Navigator

Posted: 13 years ago

Shiv was correct . Sati. should not have done that.

Quote

reima

@reima

Navigator

Posted: 13 years ago

I am surprised Sati is shown taking on Sita's form- as she had promised Shivji that she would always obey him- you know all those vachans etc., they showed- I am surprised they have shown her as shallow- even human beings if they love someone would heed the pledges given to their beloved. I am just wondering if this story is really there ( if in some versions of the Ramayan and Puran- depends who interpreted the purans).

Quote

mnx12

@mnx12

Channel Moderator

+ 14

Posted: 13 years ago

Originally posted by: reima
I am surprised Sati is shown taking on Sita's form- as she had promised Shivji that she would always obey him- you know all those vachans etc., they showed- I am surprised they have shown her as shallow- even human beings if they love someone would heed the pledges given to their beloved. I am just wondering if this story is really there ( if in some versions of the Ramayan and Puran- depends who interpreted the purans).

Even if they have shown it this way, the fact is Ram existed in different yuga only, this story is not there is Devi Puran. Let it be there is any Ramayan, I refuse to accept this always showing Sati down version. If they are refering to Puranas then none of them mentions Sati as a human.

Quote

Possessive Shivji

Related Topics

Explore Topics