TULSIDAS & VALMIKI RAMAYAN both are the authentic versions of RAMAYAN !!!
i guess chandraketu u shud def. visit KAHANI HUMARE MAHABHARAT KI FORUM ,where most of the things being shown are in-authentic !!!! that forum really needs u !!!!
You are more than welcome to believe what you like - there's no question of forcing ones belief on you, and I certainly don't wish to. However, they can't both be authentic/accurate, if they carry contradictory (not just different) accounts of what happened, as is shown here
http://www.geocities.com/bhagvatjee/vraamaayan/notesa/1difference.htm
Sample:
As for KHMK, I don't watch it in the first place, but even if I did, the fact that they are wildly inaccurate has nothing to do with whether Sagar's account of events is accurate or not. I'm viewing this Ramayan, and the one before it, and the fact that they have major, not minor deviations, not only from Valmiki but also from Tulsidas in places, is definitely something worth commenting on.Who threw Shakti to Lakshman? [Lankaa Kaand]
(1) Maanas - says Meghnaad threw the Shakti on Lakshman and it made Him unconscious. Tulasee says - "Meghnaad was very happy to see Lakshman dead and he wanted to lift Him up but Lakshman was not only Lakshman, He was the incarnation of Shesh Jee who keeps the Prithvi on his head, how it was possible to lift Him even by thousands of Raakshas."
Hanumaan had to go to Lankaa to bring Raakshas' Vaidya Sushen along with his house and he guided Hanumaan to bring some herbs from Himaalaya Parvat. On the way he met Bharat also. Later when Lakshman got all right Hanumaan took Sushen back as he brought him from there.
(2) Raamaayan - says that when Raavan came into battlefield to fight with Raam and Raam came forward to fight with Raavan , Lakshman asked permission to fight with him which Raam readily gave. Then Raavan threw Shakti at Lakshman. Of course it made Him unconscious, but Hanumaan never went to Lankaa to bring Sushen, rather Sugreev's father-in-law Sushen treated Him - of course through the herbs brought from Ksheer Saagar Parvat. And he doesn't meet even Bharat also.
Also note three things:
1. Such commentary does not cast doubt on the divinity of Shri Rama, as you seem to be implying here. Even if I disagree with some of his decisions, I by no means question his divinity;
2. A criticism of Sagar is not the same as a criticism of the Ramayan;
3. Just because I disagree with some of the things he has shown or criticize him doesn't mean that I think it's a bad serial, that it doesn't deserve to be around or that I wish to undermine it (how a forum like this could undermine this project, I have yet to figure out).
However, given that a lot of people believe what they see on TV as the divine truth, I do think it's important to point out major inaccuracies - not items that are merely added to the storyline, such as Surpanakhas later appearances, but things like Bharat being wounded in battle: I'd like to know which version of the Ramayan even has that the rulers who couldn't win Sita went to war with Rama, let alone Bharat being wounded in the battle.
P.S. to Chatterbox - thanks for making my other point for me.
Shiv Shakti
Madhubala - Ek Ishq Ek Junoon
Cricket
