DONT lose interest in RAMAYAN - Page 4

Originally posted by: Khalrika

Actually, I agree with Saby. Sorry folks if u feel otherwise!

Chandra, about the different versions:

Adbhuta Ramayan was supposed to have been authored by Valmiki himself. Also, Adhyatma Ramayan is said to be authored by Ved Vyas. Tulsidasji was highly influenced by Adhyatma Ramayan.

If u read the different versions, all authors after Valmiki modified the Ramayan to fit 2 things:

1. the soci-political aspect of their time
2. their own creativity and levels of their own bhakthi
3. dramatic effect

Most of the writers of the Ramayan, from what I am reading, seem to be great Vishnu bakhts. They are not just writing for the sake of writing fiction. Many of the translations seem to be very beautiful poetry and verse, coming from the heart as it were. It is not the ramblings of people who just want to write fiction.
When I was reading some of the poetry translated into English, I was sad that I did not know Sanskrit to read all the verses in the original. It was that beautiful.

Soci-political changes:

Many later poets changed the Ramayan to fit the mood of the society they were living in. For examples, Kamb Ramyan has Ravan lifting the whole kutiya with Sita inside it and placing it on the Pushpak viman. There is a reason for this change. People in the South are more conservative than people up North. Now, don't howl because I am going to explain that remark. In the north, it is okay to put a friendly arm around friends and relatives without people looking at u weird. My dad is from Delhi so don't get upset. I still have uncles and other relatives in Delhi. (My mom is from Chennai and I have seen both sides). I am not trying to be rude but trying to explain the changes made by the poets.

U can see that in Bollywood movies too. U will find the heroine putting a friendly arm around her jeejaji. U do that in the South (even today) and people will give u very weird looks. This is what I meant by being very conservative. So, Maharishi Kamb did not have Ravan touching Sita like he does in Valmiki. He has Ravan lifting the whole kutiya instead to please the South Indian conservative sensibilities. Because Sita is a pati-vrata, she cannot be touched even if she was not at fault, by another man. So Kamban changes it for socio-political reasons.
Valmiki has no such problem and he has Sita defending being touched by Ravan, during the agni-pravesha scene after the battle, saying she was unconscious and it was not her fault because she was also defenseless.

Similar changes are made by the Ramayan versions from South-East Asia like Indonesia, Bali, Malaysia, and other places.

Creativity and level of Bhakthi:

Many poets were great bakhts of Krishna and they have Ramji doing many things that Krishna did.
Kumaradasa who wrote Janakiharana was also a great bhakht who changed the story because he did not want Sita to say those very harsh words to Lakshman when she asks him to go in search of Rama after hearing the voice of Marica shouting for help in Ramji's voice.

This is not because they were making things up but many of these authors saw Ramji and Sitaji as avatars of Vishnu and Mahalakshmi only. Valmiki, on the other hand, treats both of them as examples of perfect humans even though he does mention here and there that Ramji is an avatar of Narayana. However, u don't get too much of the bhakthi bhav when reading Valmiki. It is very beautiful work but I do not get the bhakti bahv too much when reading Valmiki as I do when I am reading Tulsidasji. Many poets used their creativity to fit the Ramayan to their level of bhakthi.
Dramatic Effect:
Many of the writers like Bhavabooti were dramatistst. The Ramayan was changed to fit the stage. Therefore it needed to have over-the-top special effects and creative things for the sake of drama. Many Sanskrit scholars including western scholars think Bhavabooti was a great dramatist. In fact, many of them are singing his praises when he introduced the technique of the alter ego coming out of the person to talk.

pativrataa mahabhaagaa Chaaya iva anugataa sadaa || 1-73-27
iti uktvaa praakshipat raajaa ma.ntra puutam jalam tadaa |

Ananya

Excellent analysis👏👏👏

I just have one thing to add about the perceived 'bhakti' aspect of Tulsidas, Kamban and the rest: what sort of bhakti is it that they'd re-write the actions of the god they hold so dear, and then worship him/her? True bhakti would mean that they'd report what Rama/Sita said and did, and then continue to support that decision, as Valmiki did. It means supporting their actual words and deeds: it does not mean changing what they said and did, and then worshipping the altered deities. The latter is an instance of projection, where one assigns the qualities one would like the subject to have, such as Sita never being touched by Ravan, and then worships the Sita that is cast in his desired image. Speaking for myself, I hardly consider that bhakti: I'd say that bhakti would be worshipping the original Sita(/Rama) as is.

For this reason, Valmiki is the only one who strikes me as a bhakt: the others don't - at least nowhere in the same league. Note that this is not to cast aspersions on Tulsidas, Kamban or any of the other writers, but just to note that by the above definition, Valmiki not only surpasses them in accuracy, but in devotion too!

P.S. I thought that Valmiki was a Maharshi, not a Brahmarshi. I thought that the only Brahmarshis in the Ramayan were Vaishistha, Agastya and Vishwamitra. Any others?

Originally posted by: ananyacool

I don't think anybody has a problem with what you feel 😊

The later writers had to do this, or else how would their Ramayana be considered as 'different' or 'special'? Correct Socio-political aspect of prevailing time does matter and it helps form a personal opinion of individuals. 'Bhakti' too plays a major role and when Ramayana is presented as a story 'dramatic' effect too matters.

Maharishi Kamban making Ravan cleave the earth while taking away Sitaji, is not just because of socio-political aspect, its his personal opinion that his much adored mata Sita should be touched by a sinner like Ravana; agree socio-political( is) one of the aspects that influences an individual's opinion .

Its not that Valmiki had no such problem depicting Ravan lifting Sitaji, its because he has written the life of Sita-Rama "as it is" . Writing something with an unbiased mind is the most difficult thing, only a person who has conqured his mind can do that and thats why Valmiki is "Brahmarishi"

Valmiki does have a soft corner towards Sitaji because he had seen her plight with his own eyes yet he mentions Sitaji's tongue lashing on Lakshman (3-45) if he was really biased he wouldn't have mentioned that chapter at all! Valmiki even includes the harshest words spoken by Rama to Sita before agnipravesha while you can note that all other writers of Ramayana changing it so heavily because they couldn't imagine their god Rama saying something so harsh that too to Sita; even Griffith excludes some verses from his translation for obvious reasons.

One more point, if we go just by the logic of socio-political aspect then we shouldn't blame avadhis for slandering mata Sita because according to those times ,there , women were categorized nay stereotyped as being infidel if a husband was not able to provide his wife the worldly pleasures. Kaushalya categorizes such women while she imparts duties of a faithful wife to Sita before leaving to forest. During agnipravesha of Sitaji , she too pleads with Rama that he shouldn't stereotype her as those women who slipped in their ways.... so we can see that people had a 'general' opinion of such women and sadly Sitaji became a victim of such stereotyping.

I agree and disagree to this , agree becoz Valmiki Ramayan is not drenched in bhakti like Ramcharitmanas, in VR Rama is a human being with verses to hint his divinity while RCM has it that he is fully aware of his divinity thats why its written the way it is.

But I disagree that it does not invoke 'bhati-rasa' there are quite a number of celebrated verses which are used to this day few examples from VR, are:

kausalyaa suprajaa raama puurvaa sa.ndhyaa pravartate |
uttiSTha nara shaarduula kartavyam daivamaahnikam || 1-23-2

Blessed is Kaushalya(and Dasharatha too, even though not mentioned) to have you, (as their son) Rama ; The morning dawn is (fast) approaching, wake up O tiger among men ,your daily (religious) duties beckon you, do wake up soon.

This verse is an opening invocation of 'Venkatesha-Suprabhatam' and most importantly our southern movies would have been deprived of this trade-mark morning song had Valmiki not written it😉😔

The verse recited in marriages :

iyam siitaa mama sutaa saha dharma carii tava || 1-73-26
pratiicCha ca enaam bhadram te paaNim gR^ihNiiSva paaNinaa |

This Sita, my daughter, will equally share the duties you undertake; take her(hand) wishfully ,let safety betide you.

pativrataa mahabhaagaa Chaaya iva anugataa sadaa || 1-73-27
iti uktvaa praakshipat raajaa ma.ntra puutam jalam tadaa |

she who is husband-devout and prosperous will follow you like your own shadow;having said thus king Janaka poured the consecrated waters on Rama's hand.

These are recited even today in marriages.

Then there is 'Aditya hridaya stotra' which is one of the most magnifiscent invocation of Surya ,is first propounded by rishi Agastya but is penned down by Valmiki
There are many more verses which are of religious importance ; when we read each chapter of Sundar-kand ,its customary to read shri Rama-pattabhishekam of valmiki as its considered very auspicious; women are specialy advised to read Sundar-kand of Valmiki to get blessing from Hanuman and thus ward away troubles just as in Sundarkand he warded away troubles of mata Sita.

Ofcourse Ramayana is not only a treatise for bhakti, as it is made one; bhakti is not the only aspects of a human being's life.

VR is complete is all aspects ; it has socio-political, geographical , astronomical information of that era and that is why the researchers dominantly refer VR only as a basis of their research.

Originally posted by: ananyacool

@ Khalrika di: Why do you feel I have taken offense to your posts??😔 Let alone taking offence I haven't even criticized you in any away. I haven't said that you've criticized Valmiki's version even neither I've said you are wrong.

I just quoted ur post for two reasons: 1) Your post was on page 1 . 2) I wanted to to say something since yesterday but couldn't because I cannot access in the evenings as its a shared net connection( network I access gets locked in the evenings)

what I felt regarding the post you made and I did convey not criticized

If ever you feel that I've criticized or pin-pointed you or even said that you're wrong ,then I am sorry. But my post doesn't reflect it .

So please don't take it otherwise.

Originally posted by: Khalrika

Hey Ananya, I did not think u were criticizing my post. I thought I had offended u in some way. Glad this little misunderstanding have been cleared!