Age of Ram Sita During Marriage !!

First Previous

Page

Next Last

Frequent Posters

Janaki

@RamKiSeeta

Achiever

+ 6

Posted: 13 years ago

#21

The conversation here is not about which Ramayan is original or not. Many do consider Valmiki ramayan to be the original, but the Valmiki ramayan we have today is distorted. It's been passed through many hands and there were many new interpolations. As for Ramcharitmanas, it is equally revered in India as Valmiki Ramayan because Saint Tulsidas is said to have received the darshan of Hanuman who told him the Ramayan. It is people's belief that what comes out of Hanuman's mouth cannot be false.

Quote

MagadhSundari

@MagadhSundari

Sparkler

+ 4

Posted: 13 years ago

#22

A) Shivang and Janu, I really want to join the DKDM conversation but we should be having it in the DKDM thread. If I move the posts, part of this Ram-Sita age topic will also go there - so can you guys edit those portions and paste them over there please? Then I will also add my two cents to the mix :P

B) Namrata, your posts are welcome here and we thank you for the informative links. However, in accordance with the rules of this forum, please refrain from referring to any scriptural source in a way that is derogatory or disrespectful. The forum has many members who revere different versions of the same epics, and we do not wish to put down their beliefs.

Quote

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

Shivang

@ShivangBuch

Voyager

Posted: 13 years ago

#23

Originally posted by: lola610
A) Shivang and Janu, I really want to join the DKDM conversation but we should be having it in the DKDM thread. If I move the posts, part of this Ram-Sita age topic will also go there - so can you guys edit those portions and paste them over there please? Then I will also add my two cents to the mix :P

But that's DkDM appreciation thread Lola. In our logical flow of discussions (when I just said I am presently in Mahadev Parvati mood so will do more research on RamSita age later), we critically evaluated various parts of DkDM. How can we move that to AT?

Quote

MagadhSundari

@MagadhSundari

Sparkler

+ 4

Posted: 13 years ago

#24

Lol Appreciation Thread ka IF mein bada loose interpretation hai, mere bhai... sometimes it becomes a pic gallery, sometimes it includes constructive criticism. But it's upto you guys; I just thought that if I also tapkofy into the conversation then surely we will do a lot of back and forth and then this thread will no longer have anything to do with its title 😆

Quote

Shivang

@ShivangBuch

Voyager

Posted: 13 years ago

#25

Originally posted by: lola610
Lol Appreciation Thread ka IF mein bada loose interpretation hai, mere bhai... sometimes it becomes a pic gallery, sometimes it includes constructive criticism. But it's upto you guys; I just thought that if I also tapkofy into the conversation then surely we will do a lot of back and forth and then this thread will no longer have anything to do with its title 😆

Lolzzz...Jo hukum meri behena. Batao kya aur kaise karna hoga?? Mujhe kaun kaun si posts kaise copy karni hogi aur kaise reference dena hoga? Can't you take those posts to DkDM thread and edit the RamSita paragraphs by deleting them? Janu will have to do it first? Since she asked me the question about how do I enjoy the show.

Quote

Aishwarya

@pakhara

Rocker

+ 2

Posted: 13 years ago

#26

Well, here's my 2 cents worth. Child marriages were prevalent in hindu culture for a long time. We never had that 18-years-to-be-considered-an-adult thing, but I do see how that can be taken wrongly. In any case, I don't see it as totally outrageous if Sita was married to Ramji at the age of nine. It doesn't make their love any less pure, her devotion any less admirable, or the Ramayana any less awesome. And same goes with Urmila and Lakshman. The point of these epics, beyond anything else, is to create superhuman characters who are capable of being so incredibly pious and of possessing such knowledge or right and wrong.

Radha and Krishna were soulmates and their prem leela started at a very early age. They say that Radha was born before Krishna, but her eyes didn't open until he was in front of her. That only goes to prove how deep and true their love is.

Quote

Janaki

@RamKiSeeta

Achiever

+ 6

Posted: 13 years ago

#27

Originally posted by: RadhaHiBawari
Well, here's my 2 cents worth. Child marriages were prevalent in hindu culture for a long time. We never had that 18-years-to-be-considered-an-adult thing, but I do see how that can be taken wrongly. In any case, I don't see it as totally outrageous if Sita was married to Ramji at the age of nine. It doesn't make their love any less pure, her devotion any less admirable, or the Ramayana any less awesome. And same goes with Urmila and Lakshman. The point of these epics, beyond anything else, is to create superhuman characters who are capable of being so incredibly pious and of possessing such knowledge or right and wrong.

Radha and Krishna were soulmates and their prem leela started at a very early age. They say that Radha was born before Krishna, but her eyes didn't open until he was in front of her. That only goes to prove how deep and true their love is.

I don't think anyone found it wrong that Sita may have been just 9 Aishu, but some are saying she was 6, and if that was the case then Shrutakirti must have been only 1 or 2 when she married Shatrughan since she was the youngest. We are just speaking in terms of accuracy, because while child marriages were prevalant, baby marriages weren't. I'm sure all four sisters were at an age to at least understand relationships. I think Shrutakirti should have been at least 8 or 9 when she married Shatrughan, because like Shivang Anna said, that is the age when many girls think of a husband in a spiritual manner and start to understand relationships. If Shrutakirti was 8, then Sita could have been 12-13. Even that's child marriage, but it makes more sense to me because I want to take the ages of all four sisters into consideration since all four married at the same time.

Quote

Janaki

@RamKiSeeta

Achiever

+ 6

Posted: 13 years ago

#28

@Lola,

I understand you Lola, but would it be fine if we just continued the Dkdm conversation in its AT without moving any posts?😳 I know it'd look a bit cut up and random in that thread, but it'd be such a hassle moving all of them from here and moreover, I don't think it really matters since part of the discussion was about Ram and Sita also.

Instead, we can give the link of this thread and mention how some of the discussion was on Dkdm and that we're going to continue it there. Would that be fine?

Quote

MagadhSundari

@MagadhSundari

Sparkler

+ 4

Posted: 13 years ago

#29

@ Aishu - Taking your post in conjunction with Shivang's, I agree completely.

@ Janu - the link idea is perfect, wayyy easier than moving/editing stuff... so let's do it!

Re: Shrutkirti - I don't think there's any reason to believe that when Sita was 8-9, she was 1-2. Recall that even though Ram is considered the eldest, then Bharat, Lakshman, and Shatrughan, the four brothers' were all born within the same year and by today's standards they were the same age. Similarly Kush is referred to as Lav's elder brother, and they're twins! Sita found in the earth, so Sunayana could very well have had her later that same year. Mandavi and Shrutkirti were their cousins, not their sisters, so they too could have been just a year or so apart, making SUMS all around the same age just like RBLS.

Quote

Janaki

@RamKiSeeta

Achiever

+ 6

Posted: 13 years ago

#30

Originally posted by: lola610
@ Aishu - Taking your post in conjunction with Shivang's, I agree completely.

@ Janu - the link idea is perfect, wayyy easier than moving/editing stuff... so let's do it!

Re: Shrutkirti - I don't think there's any reason to believe that when Sita was 8-9, she was 1-2. Recall that even though Ram is considered the eldest, then Bharat, Lakshman, and Shatrughan, the four brothers' were all born within the same year and by today's standards they were the same age. Similarly Kush is referred to as Lav's elder brother, and they're twins! Sita found in the earth, so Sunayana could very well have had her later that same year. Mandavi and Shrutkirti were their cousins, not their sisters, so they too could have been just a year or so apart, making SUMS all around the same age just like RBLS.

Unlike RLBS though who were born the same year, SUMS weren't. Sita was found first and neither Janak nor Kushadwaj had their other daughters by them. Urmila had to have been born a year after Sita at the least, it couldn't have been sooner because Janak and Sunaina are mentioned as being childless when Sita was found, and Sita being the eldest sister, even Kushadwaj had to be childless. I don't know if Mandavi or Urmila are elder, but both could be around the same age since Janak and Kushadwaj's wives could have been pregnant at the same time, so let's say Mandavi and Shrutakirti were a year younger than Sita. As for Shrutakirti, she had to have been born after Mandavi so that's another year. At the least, if the girls were born one after the other, then Shrutakirti had to be at least two years younger than Sita if not more (it could have been more since it was never mentioned anywhere that all four sisters were born in close proximity like RLBS). If Sita was 6 at the time of marriage as some sources say, then Shrutakirti was 4 and that's still too young. Kids are still toddlers then and even with child marriages, girls were never married that young.

I think Shrutakirti was maybe nine at the time of marriage, and the other girls slightly older. That makes more sense to me as I'm thinking of this in the perspective of Shrutakirti's age more than Sita's.

Edited by JanakiRaghunath - 13 years ago