Ramayana the different versions
-
- Posts: 4066
- Joined: 26 Mar 2005, 17:01
vALmIki says otherwise. daSaratha is besotted with kaikEyi and on that particular day too, he approaches her with lust. He pleads with her variously and asks her if she is rejecting his advances as he is an old man. lakShmaNa ridicules his father on several occasions for being so passionate about a woman at his age.I never thought Dasaratha was a weak character.---Tandu
There is no doubt that daSaratha was a very righteous person. But the point is he made those promises on that fateful night when his judgement was clouded by lust. He does regret it bitterly later.
-
- Posts: 11498
- Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 22:36
DRS
An interesting point is why Dasharata chose to keep his promise to Kaikeyi. Rama of course did it to keep his father's behest. Dasharata was not protrayed as a satyasandha in Ramayana. There is a reference by LakShmaNa that he gave in due to his infatuation for Kaikeyi:
"viparItaH ca v^riddhaH ca viShayaiH ca pradharShitaH|
n^Ripa kim iva na brUyAc cOdyamAnaH samanmathaH||"(LakShmaNa's words Ayodhya kaanDaM 21.3)
Again as it was a royal command Rama had indeed no choice except be bound by that!
An interesting point is why Dasharata chose to keep his promise to Kaikeyi. Rama of course did it to keep his father's behest. Dasharata was not protrayed as a satyasandha in Ramayana. There is a reference by LakShmaNa that he gave in due to his infatuation for Kaikeyi:
"viparItaH ca v^riddhaH ca viShayaiH ca pradharShitaH|
n^Ripa kim iva na brUyAc cOdyamAnaH samanmathaH||"(LakShmaNa's words Ayodhya kaanDaM 21.3)
Again as it was a royal command Rama had indeed no choice except be bound by that!
-
- Posts: 227
- Joined: 09 Feb 2010, 08:59
.An interesting point is why Dasharata chose to keep his promise to Kaikeyi. Rama of course did it to keep his father's behest. Dasharata was not protrayed as a satyasandha in Ramayana
Sri Tulsidas answers this
Dasaratha had to keep his word because it always had been so in the race of Raghus. When Dasaratha, in an attempt to pacify Kaikeyi, asks her what was it that she wanted and that he would do anything to fulfill it, she tauntingly replies
"Maagu maagu kahahu piya kabahu na dehu na lehu
den kahehu bardaan dui teu paavat sandehu"
"You keep saying 'ask ask', but neither have you given me anything, nor have I asked for anything. Two boons you had promised me long ago, but I am doubtful of your honouring them"
Thus cut to quick, Dasaratha proudly replies,
"Raghukul reeti sadaa chali aaye
praan jaaye bar bachanu na jaayee"
"It always has been a tradition in the race of Raghus
A promise must be honoured, even at the cost of one's life."
Dasaratha goes on to swear in the name of Rama too. This is what Kaikeyi wanted and she makes her cruel demands.
In describing this incident, Tulsi faithfully follows Valmiki, even the metaphors are similar.
But while in Valmiki's , the king busts into lamentations, in Tulsi's, Dasaratha instantly agrees to the queen's first request i.e coronation of Bharat as crown prince. It is the second demand which troubles him and he hopes that his ready acceptance of her first wish would mollify her and make her withdraw her demand for Rama's banishment.
"...kachu din gaye bharat jubraju
ekahi baat mohi dukh laaga bar doosaru asamanjas maaga"
In a few days time, Bharat will be annointed Crown Prince. Only one thought troubles me. The second boon you seek seems inexplicable.
-
- Posts: 4066
- Joined: 26 Mar 2005, 17:01
Yes. daSaratha does the same thing in vAlmIki. It is incorrect to say he was not a satyasandha. He was. rAmAyaNa is the story of rAma and sItA and hence daSaratha is not described so much. After making the promise, he never once thinks of himself going back on his word but wishes rAma would refuse to heed him etc. lakShmaNa too ridicules his dad only because of making the promise in a moment of weakness. He never questions daSaratha's credibility in keeping his word. He of course praises his father too. But this kind of emotionality is lakShmaNa's very nature.---Dasaratha had to keep his word because it always had been so in the race of Raghus. When Dasaratha, in an attempt to pacify Kaikeyi, asks her what was it that she wanted and that he would do anything to fulfill it, she tauntingly replies
It is the same situation in vAlmIki as well. It is not so much the coronation of bharata but sending rAma to exile that really hits him hard.But while in Valmiki's , the king busts into lamentations, in Tulsi's, Dasaratha instantly agrees to the queen's first request i.e coronation of Bharat as crown prince. It is the second demand which troubles him --
-
- Posts: 10956
- Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 00:01
What is the rationale for kaikEyi to ask for the second boon when the first one is what she really wants? What was she afraid of if rAmA remained in ayOdhyA? Is that portrayed as a punishment of rAmA or a defensive maneuver for any perceived future troble? If it is the latter, were her fears and anxieties rational?
-
- Posts: 13754
- Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 22:26
VK,
The two reasons that I have always heard propounded in kathAs are as follows:
1. She was afraid the people of ayOdhyA would never accept bharat as the king as long as rAma was around.
2. She may have also been afraid that even if bharat was crowned, if rAma remained in ayOdhyA, bharat would be king in name only, and would defer all important decisions to rAma.
Hence the need for bharat to be crowned in/and the absence of rAma.
Ravi
The two reasons that I have always heard propounded in kathAs are as follows:
1. She was afraid the people of ayOdhyA would never accept bharat as the king as long as rAma was around.
2. She may have also been afraid that even if bharat was crowned, if rAma remained in ayOdhyA, bharat would be king in name only, and would defer all important decisions to rAma.
Hence the need for bharat to be crowned in/and the absence of rAma.
Ravi
-
- Posts: 781
- Joined: 13 Dec 2005, 15:58
-
- Posts: 4066
- Joined: 26 Mar 2005, 17:01
The reasons Ravi has listed are correct. One more reason was that manthare had scared kaikEyi that rAma might put up a fight if he was in ayOdhyA.
Kiran
It is true that kaikEyi loves rAma and is all praise for him until manthare poisons her mind. She is in fact thrilled when she hears of rAma,s coronation-to-be(Which was not to be But even when rAma accepts to go to the forest immediately, she does not flinch nor is she shaken when daSaratha dies. It is only when bharata scoffs at her and strongly derides her that she starts realising her mistake.
Kiran
It is true that kaikEyi loves rAma and is all praise for him until manthare poisons her mind. She is in fact thrilled when she hears of rAma,s coronation-to-be(Which was not to be But even when rAma accepts to go to the forest immediately, she does not flinch nor is she shaken when daSaratha dies. It is only when bharata scoffs at her and strongly derides her that she starts realising her mistake.
-
- Posts: 11498
- Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 22:36
Here is the exact translation by Griffith of VR of Rama confiding to Lakshmana at the forest.
.......
When evening rites were duly paid,
Reclined beneath the leafy shade,
To Lakshman thus spake Ráma, best
.....
'This night the king,' he cried, 'alas!
In broken sleep will sadly pass.
Kaikeyànow content should be,
For mistress of her wish is she.
So fiercely she for empire yearns,
That when her Bharat home returns,
She in her greed, may even bring
Destruction on our lord the king.
What can he do, in feeble eld,
Reft of all aid and me expelled,
His soul enslaved by love, a thrall
Obedient to KaikeyÃÂÂÂ's call?
....
For who, in wisdom's lore untaught.
Could by a beauty's prayer be bought
To quit his own obedient son,
Who loves him, as my sire has done!
....
To Bharat's single lot will fall
The kingdom and the power and all,
When fails the king from length of days,
And Ráma in the forest strays.
.....
Methinks at last the royal dame,
Dear Lakshman, has secured her aim,
To see at once her husband dead,
Her son enthroned, and Ráma fled.
.....
Certainly very human and not very complimentary of Rama...
I am sure none of the other Ramayanas (including Tulsi) will have such revealing 'confessions on the couch'.
Comments?
.......
When evening rites were duly paid,
Reclined beneath the leafy shade,
To Lakshman thus spake Ráma, best
.....
'This night the king,' he cried, 'alas!
In broken sleep will sadly pass.
Kaikeyànow content should be,
For mistress of her wish is she.
So fiercely she for empire yearns,
That when her Bharat home returns,
She in her greed, may even bring
Destruction on our lord the king.
What can he do, in feeble eld,
Reft of all aid and me expelled,
His soul enslaved by love, a thrall
Obedient to KaikeyÃÂÂÂ's call?
....
For who, in wisdom's lore untaught.
Could by a beauty's prayer be bought
To quit his own obedient son,
Who loves him, as my sire has done!
....
To Bharat's single lot will fall
The kingdom and the power and all,
When fails the king from length of days,
And Ráma in the forest strays.
.....
Methinks at last the royal dame,
Dear Lakshman, has secured her aim,
To see at once her husband dead,
Her son enthroned, and Ráma fled.
.....
Certainly very human and not very complimentary of Rama...
I am sure none of the other Ramayanas (including Tulsi) will have such revealing 'confessions on the couch'.
Comments?
-
- Posts: 11498
- Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 22:36
Shankar
The translation is true to the original though it was done by an English man. Let us admit that 'Rama' was not considered an 'avatar' for a long time. The deification started more in the last millenium! Rama was a 'good' king! But he was human according to VR subject to human emotions and foibles. Kamban and Tulsi considered Him a parabhramham and fashioned their versions accordingly. So does adhyatma Ramayana. Thyagaraja immortalized him through his music and 'blind' bhakti! If we want to evaluate Rama we have to stick to VR where he has painted him 'warts and all'. Question is 'Was Valmiki a Poet or a Historian?'
The translation is true to the original though it was done by an English man. Let us admit that 'Rama' was not considered an 'avatar' for a long time. The deification started more in the last millenium! Rama was a 'good' king! But he was human according to VR subject to human emotions and foibles. Kamban and Tulsi considered Him a parabhramham and fashioned their versions accordingly. So does adhyatma Ramayana. Thyagaraja immortalized him through his music and 'blind' bhakti! If we want to evaluate Rama we have to stick to VR where he has painted him 'warts and all'. Question is 'Was Valmiki a Poet or a Historian?'
-
- Posts: 10956
- Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 00:01
It looks like a word for word translation, hence I suppose the jumbled word order ( suppose I order word jumbled hence ).. it is so hard to read in English....
I had the same question as Ravi, so thanks for that clarification..
Though it does not mention the God connotation, the confession is more like a recap of what had happened...
>To quit his own obedient son,
>Who loves him, as my sire has done!
May be this is what you referred to as 'uncomplimentary towards rAma'. Proabably. He comes across complaining...
Is this after the news of dhasarathA's death or rAma is just predicting that all this will kill dhasarathA?
I had the same question as Ravi, so thanks for that clarification..
Though it does not mention the God connotation, the confession is more like a recap of what had happened...
>To quit his own obedient son,
>Who loves him, as my sire has done!
May be this is what you referred to as 'uncomplimentary towards rAma'. Proabably. He comes across complaining...
Is this after the news of dhasarathA's death or rAma is just predicting that all this will kill dhasarathA?
-
- Posts: 11498
- Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 22:36
Griffith has done a marvellous job translating VR in rhymed verse.
Here are the relevant shlokas
http://rapidshare.de/files/22829934/shlokas.txt.html
In fact there is more to it
Rama speculates that Kaikeyi in her frenzy might even kill Kausalya!
Now my question is: how did Valmiki know about this private conversation when there were no CNN reporters
Again why should he write as such about Rama who he wants to depict as a model human?
Did he want to bring realism to his fiction?
Now why should the other poets do a whitewash? They could have created their own fiction!
Any speculations?
Here are the relevant shlokas
http://rapidshare.de/files/22829934/shlokas.txt.html
In fact there is more to it
Rama speculates that Kaikeyi in her frenzy might even kill Kausalya!
Now my question is: how did Valmiki know about this private conversation when there were no CNN reporters
Again why should he write as such about Rama who he wants to depict as a model human?
Did he want to bring realism to his fiction?
Now why should the other poets do a whitewash? They could have created their own fiction!
Any speculations?
-
- Posts: 13754
- Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 22:26
CML,
Did not Brahma give vAlmIkI the ability to 'see' the things that occured in rAma's life as if he were a 'fly on the wall'...even better than Amanpour/CNN!
When lava and kusha sang these verses to rAma during the ashvamEdha, it is considered by many to have been the verification of all of these conversations and events...
Ravi
Did not Brahma give vAlmIkI the ability to 'see' the things that occured in rAma's life as if he were a 'fly on the wall'...even better than Amanpour/CNN!
When lava and kusha sang these verses to rAma during the ashvamEdha, it is considered by many to have been the verification of all of these conversations and events...
Ravi
-
- Posts: 10956
- Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 00:01
>Now my question is: how did Valmiki know about this
>private conversation when there were no CNN reporters
Actually, by the time of mahAbhArathA, the concept of neutral embedded reporters had become the war dharma..Isn't that the case that during mahAbhArathA war, poets, war time reporters and historians stood on top of raised platforms in the war field and sang and wrote about the happenings....And that is an accepted part of the kshathriya dharma that those are neutral parties not to be harmed by either warring parties..... Am I right?
>private conversation when there were no CNN reporters
Actually, by the time of mahAbhArathA, the concept of neutral embedded reporters had become the war dharma..Isn't that the case that during mahAbhArathA war, poets, war time reporters and historians stood on top of raised platforms in the war field and sang and wrote about the happenings....And that is an accepted part of the kshathriya dharma that those are neutral parties not to be harmed by either warring parties..... Am I right?
-
- Posts: 3326
- Joined: 21 May 2005, 13:57
-
- Posts: 11498
- Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 22:36
Thanks Shankar!
Brahma does grant vAlmiki a boon
tat ca api aviditaM sarvaM viditaM tE bhaviShyati|
na tE vAk an^RitA kAvyE kAcit atra bhaviShyati||
whatever is unown will be known to you! Never will there be falsehood in your poem.
In other words Valmiki writes his own conduct certificate. Let us grant him extrasensory perception (hoping one of these days science will uncover that technique!)
vk
It was common practice among the greeks/Romans to imbed bards when they went to war. (Have you seen Spartacus for that matter). Ancient Tamil kings are also supposed to have adopted that practice. But I don't know whether they had diplomatic immunity.
Don't worry meena
Women were never chosen for those assignments
Brahma does grant vAlmiki a boon
tat ca api aviditaM sarvaM viditaM tE bhaviShyati|
na tE vAk an^RitA kAvyE kAcit atra bhaviShyati||
whatever is unown will be known to you! Never will there be falsehood in your poem.
In other words Valmiki writes his own conduct certificate. Let us grant him extrasensory perception (hoping one of these days science will uncover that technique!)
vk
It was common practice among the greeks/Romans to imbed bards when they went to war. (Have you seen Spartacus for that matter). Ancient Tamil kings are also supposed to have adopted that practice. But I don't know whether they had diplomatic immunity.
Don't worry meena
Women were never chosen for those assignments
-
- Posts: 4066
- Joined: 26 Mar 2005, 17:01
CMLThe translation is true to the original though it was done by an English man. Let us admit that 'Rama' was not considered an 'avatar' for a long time. The deification started more in the last millenium!
The verses/translation you have quoted is only one side of the coin and does not portray rAma is the correct perspective. There are many places where rAma holds his father in great respect and does not question his rigtheousness in the least. When lakShmaNa tells his father off, rAma checks him.
As for rAma being an avatAra, there are a few places in vAlmIki itself where rAma is explicitly mentioned as none other than viShNu and that his divine purpose is the destruction of evil personified by rAvaNa. So the later poets only picked up the seeds in vAlmIki and provided a fertile soil for their growth.
-
- Posts: 10956
- Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 00:01
>his divine purpose is the destruction of evil personified by rAvaNa
DRS, an offshoot question from this. It was a fair fight with rAvaNa since he abducted sIta. What were the transgressions of rAvaNa prior to rAma's birth that caused the rAmA avathar to take place ( the reason for the divine purpose )?
DRS, an offshoot question from this. It was a fair fight with rAvaNa since he abducted sIta. What were the transgressions of rAvaNa prior to rAma's birth that caused the rAmA avathar to take place ( the reason for the divine purpose )?
-
- Posts: 227
- Joined: 09 Feb 2010, 08:59
The verses which CML quoted occur in the 53rd sarga of Ayodhya Kanda.Whilst one does detect a strain of bitterness in Rama's words, if we go back to 22nd Sarga we a get a glimpse of his greatness and magnanimity.
He says
yasya madbhishekarthemanasam paritapyate
maataa na: sa yatha na syaat savishankha tatha kuru
tasya: shankhamayam dukham muhutrtamapi notsahe
manasi pratisanjaatam soumitrehmupekshitam
Rama explains ( to Lakshmana) that he should leave for the forest immediatlly since any delay caused will make Kaikeyi anxious (that Rama might change his mind about going into exile) and that he cannot afford to ignore even for a while the agony of apprehension aroused in her mind.
In the same sarga, he also absolves Kaikeyi of all blame and instead chooses to blame Providence.
Krutaant yeva soumitre drushtvyo matpravaasena
Raajyasyacha viteernasya punareva nivartane
Providence alone shoud be regarded, O Lakshmana as being responsible for sending me into exile as well as snatching from me the sovereignity of Ayodhya which was offered to me.
satya: satyaabhisandhascha nityam satyaparakramaha
paralokabhayaad bhito nirbhayostu pita mama
(My father) who is always truthful, true to his promise, brave and valiant,
who is afraid of the the consequences to be faced in the other world if one were to go back on one's words, may such a father of mine be rid of all fear.
He says
yasya madbhishekarthemanasam paritapyate
maataa na: sa yatha na syaat savishankha tatha kuru
tasya: shankhamayam dukham muhutrtamapi notsahe
manasi pratisanjaatam soumitrehmupekshitam
Rama explains ( to Lakshmana) that he should leave for the forest immediatlly since any delay caused will make Kaikeyi anxious (that Rama might change his mind about going into exile) and that he cannot afford to ignore even for a while the agony of apprehension aroused in her mind.
In the same sarga, he also absolves Kaikeyi of all blame and instead chooses to blame Providence.
Krutaant yeva soumitre drushtvyo matpravaasena
Raajyasyacha viteernasya punareva nivartane
Providence alone shoud be regarded, O Lakshmana as being responsible for sending me into exile as well as snatching from me the sovereignity of Ayodhya which was offered to me.
One such example is to be found right here in this sarga itselfThere are many places where rAma holds his father in great respect and does not question his rigtheousness in the least.
satya: satyaabhisandhascha nityam satyaparakramaha
paralokabhayaad bhito nirbhayostu pita mama
(My father) who is always truthful, true to his promise, brave and valiant,
who is afraid of the the consequences to be faced in the other world if one were to go back on one's words, may such a father of mine be rid of all fear.
-
- Posts: 227
- Joined: 09 Feb 2010, 08:59
The most popular story told is that of Jaya and Vijaya- the two dwarapalakas of Sri Hari. When the four Sanatkumaras come to Vaikuntha, Jaya and Vijaya mocked them and made fun of them. The Sanathkumaras, cursed them to be separated from Vishnu and to be born on Earth. When Jaya and Vijaya realized their mistake, they sought pardon. Sanathkumaras modified their curse offered them a choice- either be born as good virtous people, devoted to Sri Hari for seven births or as cruel wicked demons for three births, each time meeting their end at the hands of Sri Hari. For Jaya and Vijaya, the latter choice was preferable. Hence they were born as Hiranyaksha and Hiranyakashipu, Ravana and Kumbhakarna and later on as Shishupala and Dantavakra.What were the transgressions of rAvaNa prior to rAma's birth that caused the rAmA avathar to take place ( the reason for the divine purpose )?
-
- Posts: 11498
- Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 22:36
DRS
It is possible that Rama missed his daily dose of Prozac on this particular occasion
You cannot balance 'bad' thoughts with several other 'good' thoughts. In fact the inner psyche is revealed only in those rare unguarded moments. Now here is yet another from the Aranyakanda (canto 2).
.....
You know all kings were considered as avataras of God (viShNu) and hence there is nothing strange in considering Rama as such!
vk
All those mythological stories srinidhi quotes are later inventions. RavaNa was the thorn in the flesh of 'vedic' brahmins(oil-hungry) and was wrecking havoc on their sacrifices. Rama could have used that as the WMD to launch a battle. But perhaps he wanted Blair (sugriva?) to join him. The abduction of Sita was the proper 9/11. The rest is history on the repeat. The restoration of the contemplated 'twin towers' (after the agnipravEshaM) will signal the Coronation. But first RavaNa has to be located to destroy his nikumbalai yagna....
It is possible that Rama missed his daily dose of Prozac on this particular occasion
You cannot balance 'bad' thoughts with several other 'good' thoughts. In fact the inner psyche is revealed only in those rare unguarded moments. Now here is yet another from the Aranyakanda (canto 2).
.....
This certainly counters the quote srinidhi provided about Rama's concern for Kaikeyi...When Ráma saw Virádha clasp
Fair SÃÂÂÂtá in his mighty grasp,
Thus with pale lips that terror dried
The hero to his brother cried:
'O see Virádha's arm enfold
My darling in its cursed hold,--
The child of Janak best of kings,
My spouse whose soul to virtue clings,
Sweet princess, with pure glory bright,
Nursed in the lap of soft delight.
Now falls the blow Kaikeyàmeant,
Successful in her dark intent:
This day her cruel soul will be
Triumphant over thee and me.
Though Bharat on the throne is set,
Her greedy eyes look farther yet:
Me from my home she dared expel,
Me whom all creatures loved so well.
This fatal day at length, I ween,
Brings triumph to the younger queen.
I see with bitterest grief and shame
Another touch the Maithil dame.
Not loss of sire and royal power
So grieves me as this mournful hour.'
....
You know all kings were considered as avataras of God (viShNu) and hence there is nothing strange in considering Rama as such!
vk
All those mythological stories srinidhi quotes are later inventions. RavaNa was the thorn in the flesh of 'vedic' brahmins(oil-hungry) and was wrecking havoc on their sacrifices. Rama could have used that as the WMD to launch a battle. But perhaps he wanted Blair (sugriva?) to join him. The abduction of Sita was the proper 9/11. The rest is history on the repeat. The restoration of the contemplated 'twin towers' (after the agnipravEshaM) will signal the Coronation. But first RavaNa has to be located to destroy his nikumbalai yagna....
-
- Posts: 4066
- Joined: 26 Mar 2005, 17:01
It depends on which end you are looking at things from. Yes. You cannot balance good thoughts with "human" thoughts which you choose to call as "bad".You cannot balance 'bad' thoughts with several other 'good' thoughts. In fact the inner psyche is revealed only in those rare unguarded moments. ---
This certainly counters the quote srinidhi provided about Rama's concern for Kaikeyi...
Well. vAlmIki's words do not exactly ampunt to this general category. Even rAvaNa was viShNu then!;)You know all kings were considered as avataras of God (viShNu) and hence there is nothing strange in considering Rama as such!
There is no proof to say this except that among preserved written documents, rAmAyaNa happens to be the earliest.All those mythological stories srinidhi quotes are later inventions.
-
- Posts: 55
- Joined: 02 Mar 2006, 12:21
CML: "Thyagaraja immortalized him through his music and 'blind' bhakti!"
CML, could you please explain what 'blind' bhakti here is? This is not for any argument's sake, but it could probably "redefine" the very samrajyam of Rama Bhakti, the subjects of which were Sri Raghavendra Swami, Bhadrachalam Ramadas, Muthuswamy Dikshitar, Bhagavannama Bodhendra, Col. Lionel Price, why several hundreds and thousands that have been chanting Rama nama and reciting Srimad Ramayanam.
CML, could you please explain what 'blind' bhakti here is? This is not for any argument's sake, but it could probably "redefine" the very samrajyam of Rama Bhakti, the subjects of which were Sri Raghavendra Swami, Bhadrachalam Ramadas, Muthuswamy Dikshitar, Bhagavannama Bodhendra, Col. Lionel Price, why several hundreds and thousands that have been chanting Rama nama and reciting Srimad Ramayanam.
-
- Posts: 11498
- Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 22:36
sudarshan
I put 'blind' under quotes to indicate that I was not using it in any pejorative sense. By blind I meant unquestioned or rationalized. Thyagarja accepted Rama as such without investigating or reading about him (based on Guru vacana ). That is precisely the way; one is supposed to take his 'gurus' words; just implicitly. You know the ultimate goal of sayujya is to destroy 'viveka' which is responsible for all confusions. The word does not matter. Valmiki himself attained enlightenment through repeating 'mara'! What is in a name after all? It is the ultimate, unquestioning, unflinching faith that matters! You know the folklore story of a great sinner saving a drowning man from the Ganges while all the erudite Rishis were watching debating that they were not sinless to be able to save the hapless man! For Thyagaraja Rama was the supreme deity and he needed no proof!
Sorry, in this thread we are discussing 'rational' issues about 'Rama the Man'.
I put 'blind' under quotes to indicate that I was not using it in any pejorative sense. By blind I meant unquestioned or rationalized. Thyagarja accepted Rama as such without investigating or reading about him (based on Guru vacana ). That is precisely the way; one is supposed to take his 'gurus' words; just implicitly. You know the ultimate goal of sayujya is to destroy 'viveka' which is responsible for all confusions. The word does not matter. Valmiki himself attained enlightenment through repeating 'mara'! What is in a name after all? It is the ultimate, unquestioning, unflinching faith that matters! You know the folklore story of a great sinner saving a drowning man from the Ganges while all the erudite Rishis were watching debating that they were not sinless to be able to save the hapless man! For Thyagaraja Rama was the supreme deity and he needed no proof!
Sorry, in this thread we are discussing 'rational' issues about 'Rama the Man'.
-
- Posts: 55
- Joined: 02 Mar 2006, 12:21
CML, thanks for the clarification. I've got the answer for what I asked for. I do not have anything to say about the 'rational' issues about 'Rama the man'. To tell the truth, sometimes I too have doubts about incidents in Srimad Ramayana, especially related to Uttara Kandam, but I try not to nurture them since being highly imperfect myself, who am I to debate about somebody else.
-
- Posts: 11498
- Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 22:36
DRS
I believe Valmiki was more interested in describing the Ramayana charaters as humans than divine. The odd references to divinity or extraterrestrials is just 'poetic exaggerations'. He could have had Rama say to vAli that he killed him because he was 'God' and was above laws like the biblical Jehovah; but he does not; he invokes manudharma which was the prevailing moral code for humans at that time. By the same code all Royalty were intrinsically divine and hereditary!
Ravana was the half brother of Kubera himself! Any question about his divine origin?
I believe Valmiki was more interested in describing the Ramayana charaters as humans than divine. The odd references to divinity or extraterrestrials is just 'poetic exaggerations'. He could have had Rama say to vAli that he killed him because he was 'God' and was above laws like the biblical Jehovah; but he does not; he invokes manudharma which was the prevailing moral code for humans at that time. By the same code all Royalty were intrinsically divine and hereditary!
Ravana was the half brother of Kubera himself! Any question about his divine origin?
-
- Posts: 4066
- Joined: 26 Mar 2005, 17:01
Now why should rAma declare himself as "God". God does not have the need to declare Himself. It is for others to sing praise.He could have had Rama say to vAli that he killed him because he was 'God' and was above laws like the biblical Jehovah; but he does not;
rAma says several times- "AtmAnam mANuSham manyE"- "I consider myself a human being".
Apart from the above reason that he had no need to declare himself, the 2nd reason was that rAvaNa could not be killed by Gods or anyone except humans or vAnaras(This was God's own Word). Therefore, the moment rAma invoked divinity in himself, he would be unable to fulfill his divine purpose of decimating rAVaNa and his hordes.
Recall that indra leaves in a hurry from sage Sarabhanga hermitage when rAma approaches it saying the time has not come yet for him to meet rAma and that the time will only come after rAma slays rAvaNa.
You cannot call vALmIki a very down-to earth poet in one breath and in the next breath declare his verses as "poetic exaggeration". Such conclusions are for ones own convenience.
-
- Posts: 11498
- Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 22:36
DRS
I never said Valmiki was an ordinary ('down-to-earth') poet! In fact he was/is among the best. But my question is, was he also a Historian. There is ample evidence to believe that Rama was indeed a 'real' historical person. Once we admit that, we should discuss him on the human plane eschewing all references to divinity. Rama did not use 'magic' to achieve any of his missions. He stood up for the best of human qualities. Every human can aspire to be 'Rama the Man' ignoring the poet's 'Rama the parabrahmam'. In that context pl do not use miracles, curses, boons and magic to justify his actions. On the level we should also consider Ravana as a human. Do you honestly believe that Ravana could not be killed 'ordinarily'! Ultimately Rama kills him in combat 'just like Zarkavi' ( perhaps a misguided US poet could claim divine powers to GW
We should look at Rama and his actions as much as we would any other human without bringing in the divine element!
To me Rama's blaming Kaikeyi/Dasharatha during adversity is distinctly human. It is easy to philosophize when your nose is not on fire. When the chips are down Rama does react like any other human and that is what we should appreciate! He does recover himself after the crisis and holds no ill will after rationally attributing their behaviour to 'providence'. Therein is the lesson for us! He does not try to be vengeful to Kaikeyi later on in spite of all the hardships he had to endure. In this everlasting battle between the 'Ego and the ID' the 'Super Ego' wins out which is what we should strive for as humans. That is the practical lesson from the Life of Rama which Valmiki has picturesquely captured!
I never said Valmiki was an ordinary ('down-to-earth') poet! In fact he was/is among the best. But my question is, was he also a Historian. There is ample evidence to believe that Rama was indeed a 'real' historical person. Once we admit that, we should discuss him on the human plane eschewing all references to divinity. Rama did not use 'magic' to achieve any of his missions. He stood up for the best of human qualities. Every human can aspire to be 'Rama the Man' ignoring the poet's 'Rama the parabrahmam'. In that context pl do not use miracles, curses, boons and magic to justify his actions. On the level we should also consider Ravana as a human. Do you honestly believe that Ravana could not be killed 'ordinarily'! Ultimately Rama kills him in combat 'just like Zarkavi' ( perhaps a misguided US poet could claim divine powers to GW
We should look at Rama and his actions as much as we would any other human without bringing in the divine element!
To me Rama's blaming Kaikeyi/Dasharatha during adversity is distinctly human. It is easy to philosophize when your nose is not on fire. When the chips are down Rama does react like any other human and that is what we should appreciate! He does recover himself after the crisis and holds no ill will after rationally attributing their behaviour to 'providence'. Therein is the lesson for us! He does not try to be vengeful to Kaikeyi later on in spite of all the hardships he had to endure. In this everlasting battle between the 'Ego and the ID' the 'Super Ego' wins out which is what we should strive for as humans. That is the practical lesson from the Life of Rama which Valmiki has picturesquely captured!
-
- Posts: 13754
- Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 22:26
Smt. MSS has rendered 'tatO yagnyE samAptEshu' describing rAmA's birth in her AIR programme on rAmanavamI (I like to think of that program as 'navami anru navamaNigaL' - because she sings 9 compostions by 9 gems of composers), and in another commercial release she has described how sItA says that she will remain true to rAma just like an illustrious line of satIs and pativratAs before her - 'dInOvA rAjyahInOvA'. I am not aware of anyone singing the whole kAvya. Everyone knows Smt. MSS's divine rendition of the nAma rAmAyaNam. TM Krishna and Sangeeta Shivakumar have rendered a couple of slOkAs from VR.
Mukesh has rendered the RCM beautifully, and his son, Nitin Mukesh has rendered another version of easy-to-undertand rAmAyaNa story - 'sun lO pAwan rAm kahAnI'....Have not heard of any renderings of adyatmarAmAyaNam.
Ravi
Mukesh has rendered the RCM beautifully, and his son, Nitin Mukesh has rendered another version of easy-to-undertand rAmAyaNa story - 'sun lO pAwan rAm kahAnI'....Have not heard of any renderings of adyatmarAmAyaNam.
Ravi
-
- Posts: 1258
- Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 07:55
Just saw this thread and the good discussions. Of particular interest to me was the divination of ShrIrAma which the different composers hold their contentions. vAlmIki seems to be ambivalent (sometimes like rAjacaritam - story of kings) then again as he recounts in his verse on the birth of rAma "sAkshAt vishNoH caturbhAga..." I haven't gone through tulasidAsa's rAmacaritamAnas but I have read articles citing he holds rAma absolute (as did ShrI tyAgarAja and bhadrAchala rAmadAs, although the latter has composed a cUrNika associating each accounts of the rAmAyaNa to each of the 24 names of viShNu) . ShrI ezhutAcan in his malayALa "adhyAtma rAmAyaNa" holds sItA & rAma as both lakshmI and nArAyaNa Themselves.
Wonder if someone could give interpretations on this from the telugu (ranganAtha rAmAyaNa), tamizh (kamba rAmAyaNa) and the Oriya (krittibhAs) versions.
If any of you are interested, Gita Press has provided the text of the whole rAmacaritamAnasa of tulsidAs on its site: http://www.gitapress.org/Download_Eng_pdf.htm
Wonder if someone could give interpretations on this from the telugu (ranganAtha rAmAyaNa), tamizh (kamba rAmAyaNa) and the Oriya (krittibhAs) versions.
If any of you are interested, Gita Press has provided the text of the whole rAmacaritamAnasa of tulsidAs on its site: http://www.gitapress.org/Download_Eng_pdf.htm
-
- Posts: 13754
- Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 22:26
Couple of interesting points that I want CML/DRS/Srinidhi or anyone else for that matter to explain:
1. When vAlmIki describes the birth of the divine brothers, he states, kausalyA and sumitrA gave birth to rAma, and lakshmaNa, shatrughNa respectively (they were the 'fortunate mothers' to have borne these divine sons), but when it comes to bharat, he says: bharata was born to kaikEyI - was he giving an indication of things to come, and very subtly hinting that kaikEyI's conduct will not be as respectworthy as the other two? aruNAchala kavi in his rAmanATakam says of all of them uniformly: '......vayiTTril inrundu vandAr'
2. And doesn't he go on to say 'vishNOrardham mahA bhAgam, putram ichvAku vardhanam'? What does this mean? Is he referring to the fact that rAma represented one half of the divinity in the bowl of pAyasam?
vEmpatti chinna satyam in his 'sItA swayamvaram' ballet, describes how dasharata distributes the pAyasam in such elegant telugu: 'paTTamahishi kausalyaku sakhamu (1/2 of the whole - rAma), migilina sakhamulO sumitraku sakhamu (1/4 of the whole - lakshmaN), migilina sakhamu kaikEyi sumitraku sari sakhamu (1/8 of the whole each - bharat and shatrughNa)' - I think this pattern also describes the order of their birth as well as the how the brothers paired off in their devotions: lakshmaN was devoted to rAma, and shatrughNa to bharat...
Ravi
1. When vAlmIki describes the birth of the divine brothers, he states, kausalyA and sumitrA gave birth to rAma, and lakshmaNa, shatrughNa respectively (they were the 'fortunate mothers' to have borne these divine sons), but when it comes to bharat, he says: bharata was born to kaikEyI - was he giving an indication of things to come, and very subtly hinting that kaikEyI's conduct will not be as respectworthy as the other two? aruNAchala kavi in his rAmanATakam says of all of them uniformly: '......vayiTTril inrundu vandAr'
2. And doesn't he go on to say 'vishNOrardham mahA bhAgam, putram ichvAku vardhanam'? What does this mean? Is he referring to the fact that rAma represented one half of the divinity in the bowl of pAyasam?
vEmpatti chinna satyam in his 'sItA swayamvaram' ballet, describes how dasharata distributes the pAyasam in such elegant telugu: 'paTTamahishi kausalyaku sakhamu (1/2 of the whole - rAma), migilina sakhamulO sumitraku sakhamu (1/4 of the whole - lakshmaN), migilina sakhamu kaikEyi sumitraku sari sakhamu (1/8 of the whole each - bharat and shatrughNa)' - I think this pattern also describes the order of their birth as well as the how the brothers paired off in their devotions: lakshmaN was devoted to rAma, and shatrughNa to bharat...
Ravi
-
- Posts: 1258
- Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 07:55
W/ rgd to the appropriation of the pAyasa obtained as the fruit from the putrakAmEShTi yAga, I believe the whole portion was distributed half exactly between kausalyA and kaikEyI, and subsequently to make equal, they gave their halves to sumitrA (hence sumitra benefitted from two different portions). Obviously, kausalyA's fortune was to beget Lord vishNu as her own son, hence vAlmIki's contention in the avatAra gaTTam. I would think the rest of rAma's brothers were actually AdiShEsha Who accompanied him in these special incarnations to protect lakshmi.
I remember reading some commentaries on the rAmAyaNa in back issues of Ananda vikaTan and remember vaguely citing mantarai (the guni) being Goddess sarasvati Herself kickstrating the whole epic thus instigating the great epic. Also, guha was supposedly Lord subrahmaNya (being nephew of viShNu) rendering assistance. I can't remember the the rest but on a whole the events in the story were already foretold and portended that they took place in exact sequence as well.
I remember reading some commentaries on the rAmAyaNa in back issues of Ananda vikaTan and remember vaguely citing mantarai (the guni) being Goddess sarasvati Herself kickstrating the whole epic thus instigating the great epic. Also, guha was supposedly Lord subrahmaNya (being nephew of viShNu) rendering assistance. I can't remember the the rest but on a whole the events in the story were already foretold and portended that they took place in exact sequence as well.
-
- Posts: 227
- Joined: 09 Feb 2010, 08:59
Ravi,
This is indeed interesting, since Tulsi and Valmiki are directly at variance here.
This is what Valmiki has to say
One half of the payasam was given to Kausalya.
One half of the remaining half (i.e one fourth ) was given to Sumitra.
The remaining quarter was further divided equally and one portion (i.e one eighth of the original) was given to Kaikeyi and the remaining one eighth was again given to Sumitra.
It is commonly believed that
Sri Rama was the Human represenation of the form of Vishnu
Lakshmana was the Human representation of Adishesha (one quarter)
Bharata and Shatrughna were the Representaions of the Shankha and Chakra.
But Valmiki contradicts himself in two places-
In the scene describing the birth of the four brothers, he describes Bharata as representing one quarter of the form of Vishnu (saakshaad vishnoschaturbhaga)
Towards the very end of Ramayana, in the 106 sarga of Uttara Khanda, describing the departure of Lakshmana to the heavens, Valmiki writes thus
tato vishnoschaturbhagamagatam sursattama..... claimng that Lakshmana was the fourth part of Vishnu.
Tulsidas , in a bid to better explain the pairing (Rama-Laksmana; Bharata-Shatrughna) and describes the distribution thus
One half was given to Kausalya,
One quarter given to Kaikeyi
The remaining quarter was further divided into two halves -given to Kaikeyi and Kauslaya- who in turn fed them to Sumitra. This version better explains the order of the Births. First Rama- (Punarvasu Nakshatra), then Bharata-(Pushya) lakshmana and Shatrughna .(Ashlesha)
This is indeed interesting, since Tulsi and Valmiki are directly at variance here.
This is what Valmiki has to say
One half of the payasam was given to Kausalya.
One half of the remaining half (i.e one fourth ) was given to Sumitra.
The remaining quarter was further divided equally and one portion (i.e one eighth of the original) was given to Kaikeyi and the remaining one eighth was again given to Sumitra.
It is commonly believed that
Sri Rama was the Human represenation of the form of Vishnu
Lakshmana was the Human representation of Adishesha (one quarter)
Bharata and Shatrughna were the Representaions of the Shankha and Chakra.
But Valmiki contradicts himself in two places-
In the scene describing the birth of the four brothers, he describes Bharata as representing one quarter of the form of Vishnu (saakshaad vishnoschaturbhaga)
Towards the very end of Ramayana, in the 106 sarga of Uttara Khanda, describing the departure of Lakshmana to the heavens, Valmiki writes thus
tato vishnoschaturbhagamagatam sursattama..... claimng that Lakshmana was the fourth part of Vishnu.
Tulsidas , in a bid to better explain the pairing (Rama-Laksmana; Bharata-Shatrughna) and describes the distribution thus
One half was given to Kausalya,
One quarter given to Kaikeyi
The remaining quarter was further divided into two halves -given to Kaikeyi and Kauslaya- who in turn fed them to Sumitra. This version better explains the order of the Births. First Rama- (Punarvasu Nakshatra), then Bharata-(Pushya) lakshmana and Shatrughna .(Ashlesha)
-
- Posts: 781
- Joined: 13 Dec 2005, 15:58
-
- Posts: 2806
- Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 16:52
-
- Posts: 13754
- Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 22:26
Mohan,
Here are 2 versions: By SSI, and a more detailed one by MDR. The second file is in the AAC format.
Ravi
http://rapidshare.com/files/17058511/Sr ... andinI.zip
Here are 2 versions: By SSI, and a more detailed one by MDR. The second file is in the AAC format.
Ravi
http://rapidshare.com/files/17058511/Sr ... andinI.zip
-
- Posts: 2806
- Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 16:52
Thanks Ravi.
I am trying to choose ragas for the navarasas. MDR has sung the sloka in just a few ragas (Khamas, Saveri, Sahana, Kapi).
One version I have heard use:
Shringaram - Love (kalyani)
Veera - Courage (atana)
Karunya - Compassion (sahana)
Hasya - Mirth (amritavarshini)
Adhbuta - Wonder (hamsanandi)
Bhayanaka - Fear (subhapantuvarali)
Bheebatsa - Disgust (begada)
Roudra - Anger (mohanam)
Shantam - peace (sindhubhairavi)
I don't think some of these ragas suit that well. Any other suggestions?
I am trying to choose ragas for the navarasas. MDR has sung the sloka in just a few ragas (Khamas, Saveri, Sahana, Kapi).
One version I have heard use:
Shringaram - Love (kalyani)
Veera - Courage (atana)
Karunya - Compassion (sahana)
Hasya - Mirth (amritavarshini)
Adhbuta - Wonder (hamsanandi)
Bhayanaka - Fear (subhapantuvarali)
Bheebatsa - Disgust (begada)
Roudra - Anger (mohanam)
Shantam - peace (sindhubhairavi)
I don't think some of these ragas suit that well. Any other suggestions?
-
- Posts: 13754
- Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 22:26
Mohan,
Lord knows I am no expert, but in my layman's experience, SubhapantuvarALI evokes pathos and not fear in me. How about SivaSakti for fear? mOhanam would better suit love/SringAra in my opinion...has never evoked sentiments of roudram AFAIK (In fact, I have heard it called the jaganmOhanakara rAga or sammOhanakara rAga),... for peace/SAntam, maybe tilang (like Sethumadhava Rao's SAnti nilava vEnDum). aThANA and SahAnA sound appropriate...
Maybe DRS can help you better!
Lord knows I am no expert, but in my layman's experience, SubhapantuvarALI evokes pathos and not fear in me. How about SivaSakti for fear? mOhanam would better suit love/SringAra in my opinion...has never evoked sentiments of roudram AFAIK (In fact, I have heard it called the jaganmOhanakara rAga or sammOhanakara rAga),... for peace/SAntam, maybe tilang (like Sethumadhava Rao's SAnti nilava vEnDum). aThANA and SahAnA sound appropriate...
Maybe DRS can help you better!
-
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 04:25
I would choose the following ragas. I have also given an example where a vAggEyakArar has used it in that context.
SringAram - kApi (parullannamATa-subburAyar)
vIram - atANA (yEla ni daya-tyAgarAjar)
kAruNyam - sahAnA (vandanamu-tyAgarAjar)
hAsyam - kuntaLavarALi (kaNDavarkku kanavilum-svarnAvEnkatESa dikSitar)
Adhbuta - bilahari (dorakuna iTuvamTi-tyAgarAjar)
bhayanakam - ??????
bhIbatsam - dhEnukA (tEliya lEru-tyAgarAjar)
roudram - rudrapriyA (rudrakOpajAta-muttusvAmi dikSitar)
SAntam - sAmA (SantamulEkA-tyAgarAjar)
IMHO, I dont think any raga can invoke fear in us.
Incidently, I did a google search on navarasas and landed on this.
http://www.lokvani.com/lokvani/article. ... le_id=1710
SringAram - kApi (parullannamATa-subburAyar)
vIram - atANA (yEla ni daya-tyAgarAjar)
kAruNyam - sahAnA (vandanamu-tyAgarAjar)
hAsyam - kuntaLavarALi (kaNDavarkku kanavilum-svarnAvEnkatESa dikSitar)
Adhbuta - bilahari (dorakuna iTuvamTi-tyAgarAjar)
bhayanakam - ??????
bhIbatsam - dhEnukA (tEliya lEru-tyAgarAjar)
roudram - rudrapriyA (rudrakOpajAta-muttusvAmi dikSitar)
SAntam - sAmA (SantamulEkA-tyAgarAjar)
IMHO, I dont think any raga can invoke fear in us.
Incidently, I did a google search on navarasas and landed on this.
http://www.lokvani.com/lokvani/article. ... le_id=1710
Amongst the eight Rasas, four Rasas happen to be the sources of the other four Rasas:
Shringara comes from Hasya, from Raudra comes the Karuna, from the Vira comes the Adhbuta and from the the Bibhatsa comes the Bhayanaka. The culminating experience of all Rasas is supposed to be the ninth Rasa Shanthi Rasa.
Last edited by ksrimech on 19 Feb 2007, 06:50, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 11498
- Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 22:36
In my view the following feels appropriate:
Shringaram - Love (kalyani)
Veera - Courage (atana)
Karunya - Compassion (sankarabharaNam
Hasya - Mirth (Khamas)
Adhbuta - Wonder (shivaranjani
Bhayanaka - Fear (revati)
Bheebatsa - Disgust (begada)
Roudra - Anger (Kedaragowlai)
Shantam - peace (madhyamavati/suruTTi)
Shringaram - Love (kalyani)
Veera - Courage (atana)
Karunya - Compassion (sankarabharaNam
Hasya - Mirth (Khamas)
Adhbuta - Wonder (shivaranjani
Bhayanaka - Fear (revati)
Bheebatsa - Disgust (begada)
Roudra - Anger (Kedaragowlai)
Shantam - peace (madhyamavati/suruTTi)
-
- Posts: 1876
- Joined: 04 Feb 2010, 02:05
bilahari is good for adbhuta. mukhAri is another suitable candidate for adbhuta (wonder) - remember enta ninnE varNintu; I have used this in kAvyavAcana in places where this mood was needed, and IMO, it comes out very well.ksrimech wrote:Adhbuta - bilahari (dorakuna iTuvamTi-tyAgarAjar)
For shAnta (in addition to sAma) I would vote for vAgadhIswari too - again from kAvyavAcana experience.
-Ramakriya
-
- Posts: 2806
- Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 16:52
Thanks for all the suggestions. I liked the idea of kapi for shringaram. Has "kama"vardhani got anything to do with this rasa? Bilahari also is a good choice for adbhuta and revati for bhayanaka. What all the varying choices illustrate is that depending on the phrases used in a raga, you can get different emotions.
Ravi - it was to be used for a Rama navami dance program. I was going to ornament the Navarasa slokam with swarams/jathis between each verse/rasa. It is not finalised and may be replaced by Neela Ramaurthy's maasil ayodhiyil instead (see the sahitayam thread).
Ravi - it was to be used for a Rama navami dance program. I was going to ornament the Navarasa slokam with swarams/jathis between each verse/rasa. It is not finalised and may be replaced by Neela Ramaurthy's maasil ayodhiyil instead (see the sahitayam thread).