Rubi's sita look:)

First Previous

Page

Next Last

Frequent Posters

Janaki

@RamKiSeeta

Achiever

+ 6

Posted: 12 years ago

#41

Of course none of us know what truly happened, but that cannot be the excuse for TV directors to show what they want. We base our knowledge off of the scriptures we have. They may or may not be 100% accurate, but I believe they are far more accurate than the folk stories that have come up in the recent years from different regions. The scriptures were written by sages who all had divine vision. We cannot discard or discredit them.

Quote

Simran Ramphal

@SimSimmer

Rocker

+ 3

Posted: 12 years ago

#42

I checked the pic. out...I don't see an arrow attached to the bow😃 So no big deal...Don't make assumptions before watching what actually happened😛 We'll all have to wait to see what was this scene😉

Quote

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

Angie

@Angie12

Rocker

+ 2

Posted: 12 years ago

#43

@Janaki, let me try to clarify my thoughts further. Before I do that, let me say that I do respect your opinion too. I am not trying to change anybody's opinion here, but just stating what I think about characters. Anybody or everybody has a right to agree or disagree with my opinion.

I agree that there is over analysis of the picture. It is more than likely that Sita is just picking up Pinaka and it is nothing more than that.

I am not comparing Sita with either Draupadi or Satyabhama who were both quite fiery characters. Sita on the other hand was a soft gentle personality and she was devoted to Ram just as Ram was devoted to her as both were soul mates. Draupadi on the other hand never got the exclusive love of the person she adored and that was Arjun.

Satyabhama did know how to fight but even for her there are two versions of story. There is a story of Narkasur whom either she or Krishna killed. In one version, she just accompanied Krishna and he is the one who slayed him. In the other version, only a woman belonging to his dynasty (even if it was a distant relation) could slay him. Satyabhama was related to him in some way or other because of his mother Bhoomi and thus was the only one who could slay him. She did that with Krishna's help and encouragement.

So for every character, there are lot of versions and stories. Ramayan was spread to Thailand, Combodia, Vietnam, Indonesia etc. There too different local versions float just as they do for Buddhism. In India too, there are different versions different on the region. The basic story in all versions remain the same to the best of my knowledge.

However, there is still nothing wrong if they do show Sita having knowledge of weapons as long as Sita is not shown fighting Ram's battles. There are several interpretations of Ramayan's and Mahabharat's characters over the centuries based on the culture of the era and writer's vision. As I said Tulsi version is quite different from Valmiki's version. There is even a different explanation for Manthra's actions in instigating Kakayi against Ram. The agnipariksha in Tulsi Ramayan was done so that the fake Sita could vanish and real Sita (the one who was not kidnapped) could return. That was different from Valmiki's version.

I do consider Valmiki version as the source of Ramayan as Sita lived in Valmiki's ashram. Even then there is lot of controversy about Valmiki version as some Sanskrit scholars do not think that Valmiki wrote Uttar Kand based on the writing style of the latter part. Also some scholars find it hard to reconcile Prince Ram (who gave Ahiliya her rights) with King Ram who could let his wife suffer even if it was for greater good.

I agree that Sita was a gentle soft character. But how does her having knowledge of weapons make her hard or ungentle or un-devoted to Ram? Both Ram and Sita were avtaars of Vishnu and Lakshmi. But didn't Ram still learn all about weapons from Vashisht and Vishwamitra? His being avatar did not automatically make him knowledgeable about divine weapons. So even if Sita was capable of lifting up Pinaka because of her being an avatar, she still would need to learn about them.

As far as TV serials are concerned, I find that they make Sita and Ram very one-dimensional characters and one-dimensional characters do not interest me too much. Sita and Ram were multi-dimensional characters to me and so far I have not found their depiction entirely to my satisfaction. It does not mean that others don't find the depiction satisfying. Here I am just talking about me. I have read many books where I have read better interpretations. But I have yet to find that satisfaction by watching a TV serial about Ramayan.

Anyway, probably we will go on having this debate because both of us have some different opinion even though I do agree with many of your views. So lets leave it at this. Again my intention is to not hurt anybody's sentiments about Ram/Sita or Ramayan or any depiction they love.

Quote

Prem(ms)

@radev24

Stunner

+ 2

Posted: 12 years ago

#44

Originally posted by: Tarakari
we do not know the whole mythology or about the true events behind them, but we are trying our best to understand it.

So true and the same sentiments can be said for any scriptures, be that Hindu or not.

Originally posted by: JanakiRaghunath
Of course none of us know what truly happened, but that cannot be the excuse for TV directors to show what they want. We base our knowledge off of the scriptures we have. They may or may not be 100% accurate, but I believe they are far more accurate than the folk stories that have come up in the recent years from different regions. The scriptures were written by sages who all had divine vision. We cannot discard or discredit them.

Your explanation right on! And growing up my mother has been telling us exactly same thing in Hindi about sadhu sants having "divya drishti" ie 'Divine vision".

My main concern or reason, if you will, is that the scriptures are meant to help us carve our own destiny in this kalyug, like Bhagwat Geeta.

I once read a book "Anatomy of the spirit" by a highly welknown American medical intuitive Dr Carolyn Myss where mere 4 words in one of the early chapters of this book blew me away ...

"We are scripturally wired." OMG!

Quote

Prem(ms)

@radev24

Stunner

+ 2

Posted: 12 years ago

#45

Looks like same thread discussion is/was going on @ CB forum as well.

So me c/p my Q gals!😆 Would appreciate to read your lovely and "brief" pov! Tanku!

Originally posted by: radev24
Misti and Angie, just curious to know how you both seem experts in your knowledge about Indian Mythology, esp to those like me who has been exposed to many, esp Bhagwat Geeta and the Krishna-Arjun convo and how if being applied in our daily interactions, could transform us human beings. But knowing and discussing with authority are two different things. Hai na?!

Edit: And no modesty allowed😉

Edited by radev24 - 12 years ago

Quote

Prem(ms)

@radev24

Stunner

+ 2

Posted: 12 years ago

#46

2 more min to go for me to watch an epi the very 1st time and that too an ME?! And that too when supposedly our grown Sita (Ruby) is going to be on?! If true, could i have asked for anything more? Decidedly Nope!

Quote

Janaki

@RamKiSeeta

Achiever

+ 6

Posted: 12 years ago

#47

Originally posted by: Angie12

I agree that Sita was a gentle soft character. But how does her having knowledge of weapons make her hard or ungentle or un-devoted to Ram? Both Ram and Sita were avtaars of Vishnu and Lakshmi. But didn't Ram still learn all about weapons from Vashisht and Vishwamitra? His being avatar did not automatically make him knowledgeable about divine weapons. So even if Sita was capable of lifting up Pinaka because of her being an avatar, she still would need to learn about them.

As far as TV serials are concerned, I find that they make Sita and Ram very one-dimensional characters and one-dimensional characters do not interest me too much. Sita and Ram were multi-dimensional characters to me and so far I have not found their depiction entirely to my satisfaction. It does not mean that others don't find the depiction satisfying. Here I am just talking about me. I have read many books where I have read better interpretations. But I have yet to find that satisfaction by watching a TV serial about Ramayan.

First of all, yes I agree we should disagree, because like you said, we have different opinions on the Ramayana.

My problem with Sita being shown with weapons is that it was against the practices of that time. It's not that I find it wrong for women to have weapons. I am fine whether they did or did not, but I am a huge stickler for customs, and the customs of treta yuga were pretty strict for women. They just did not wield weapons. It was a masculine thing because women were expected to depend on their husbands or sons throughout their life for protection.

Also, both Vasishta and Vishvamitra knew Ram had divine knowledge of everything when he was born. He did not need any knowledge, but they gave him knowledge to fulfill their dharma to help his human avatar. That is if we believe Ram knew about his divinity or not. Some people believe he was oblivious to his divinity, some don't. I believe Ram and Sita both knew they were Gods, so for me they did not need any formal education. They only took it to display their leela as humans.

Anyway, even if we see them as just humans, Ram was given education because he was a man and would have to use martial skills to protect his family. As a woman, Sita did not need such skills because women back then had a different type of education from men. They learned the skills of a good wife and daughter-in-law. Sita lifted the Shiva dhanush not because she wanted to learn warfare, but because she and her friends were playing and their ball got stuck under the bow. Also, Sita lifted the bow during her childhood when she was only 5 or 6...not when she was an adult. It was all a child's play, so the context was completely different from what we're discussing now.

About TV serials, I agree that our interpretation of Ram and Sita must be different. I see them more as ideal characters who taught the difference between good and bad. For me, Ramayan is not a tale of gray-shaded characters. It's a tale of ideal characters so yes, I guess you can say I view them in a one-dimensional manner which is also how TV serials show them. I don't want to see Ram and Sita as faulty humans. For me, they were the ideal man and wife so I am very much satisfied with how TV portrays them. But since your interpretation of them is different, I can understand how you'd be dissatisfied. So yes, let's agree to disagree. It was nice debating with you. 😊

Quote

ashna

@ashna26

Sparkler

+ 2

Posted: 12 years ago

#48

thanks for sharing.. love the first look as Sita. Rubina has a classical beautiful face.. interesting to see Rubina in this character. Always wanted to see Rubina in this kinda role..