Posted:
Originally posted by: godisone
We can't completely abandon Tulsidas's Ramayan as false when it comes to sources, because there's a lot of truth in it too.
I don't mean to disrespect those who believe Tulsidas' version, let alone hurt their sentiments (and am saddened that some took it that way), but I look at Ramayan as not only religious, but also a historical text. Tulsidas lived in the 16th century when he wrote RCM, whereas Valmiki lived in the treta yuga and was a contemporary of Rama. So while I do tend to look at certain accounts of Valmiki, such as Rama ruling for 10000 years as more of a metaphorical rather than a chronologically exact statement, I do think there is a historical preference that Valmiki deserves on that basis.
Originally posted by: godisone
Of course, he may have made some mistakes here and there with the story line, because no director is perfect, but out of all the directors who made a Luv Kush serial/movie, I'd trust him first, because he conducted a lot of research and put so much effort into his script before taking the Ramayan and Luv Kush. If Dr. Ramanand Sagar chose more stories from Tulsidas Ramayan over Valmiki Ramayan, there's nothing wrong with that, because Tulsidas Ramayan is still Ramayan.
The basis for accepting Tulsidas' account would be a belief that Hanuman actually came and narrated that story to him, but even then, imho, it begs a question of why it was different from Valmiki, and an explanation of those discrepancies. Therefore, while you are right that both are still Ramayans, there are (at times major) differences between them, which would bring up more questions than answers if both were given equal weight.
Okay, first my disclaimer - what I'm about to write is not a condemnation of Sagar, but an observation of how he blended the 2 Ramayans, and how the composite compared to the actual accounts in either case. So an aside to others - please don't be offended by what follows.
Here is an example. In Valmiki, Shatrughan is sent to conquer Madhupura shortly after the exile of Sita, and is present at their naming ceremony. After he kills Lavanasura, he becomes the ruler of that place, and 12 years later, returns to Ayodhya to participate in the Ashwamedha yagna. In that yagna, Rama sends Lakshman out with the horse, and that whole expedition goes off without incident.
In Tulsidas Lav-Kush kanda, no such thing happens. Instead, when Rama is ready to do the Ashwamedha yagna, he sends Shatrughan (not Lakshman) along with his sons Subahu and ______ (he uses a different name than Shatrughatee), and the conquest of Madhupura and the tour of the horse are combined. In that battle, Shatrughan and his sons battle Lavanasura and his sons and kill them, and following that, Subahu and his brother are crowned rulers of Mathura and Vidisha, and after crowning them, Shatrughan continued in his journey during which the horse got captured by Luv. In other words, in Tulsidas, Shatrughan never became king.
Now, both these accounts, though inconsistent, are fine. But looking at the way Sagar combined them, he follows Valmiki for the first part - Shatrughan killing Lavanasura at the beginning of the war, but then, for the Ashwamedha yagna part of it, he uses Tulsidas' account. As a result, Rama asks Shatrughan - an independent ruler - to lead his army, instead of either Lakshman or Bharat, who are still in his service. Neither Valmiki nor Tulsidas had this oddity - the former had Lakshman doing the job, while the latter had Shatrughan doing it, but without making him a ruler. But Sagar ended up with it as a result of the way in which he picked and combined the 2 versions. From what I know, when rulers performed Ashwamedha yagnas, they'd send one of their own subjects, usually a brother or son, to accompany the horse, but not another ruler. Once Shatrughan became a king, it wouldn't have been protocol for Rama to give such a job to him.
Note that this is an observation that's only valid for Luv-Kush - in the main Ramayan, Sagar seems to follow Tulsidas across the board, and there are no such issues. It'll be interesting to see how the current serial - if it includes the Uttarkand or the Luv-Kush kand, would handle this.
Cricket
