Sleet of Emotional Quivers on RadhaKrishn Love CC#10/DT Nt Pg#41 - Page 57

Thankyou Chhiillli for the detailed response

The major problem at least guess in Ram Ravan war was different approach of various tribes. Although we believe that prior to Islamic invasions India was one (from Atak to Cuttak, from Sagarmatha to Kanyakumari) but that wasn't ever the case

India is a unique case in ancient civilizations list because of the mammoth area it's civilization covered (we know how big was Saraswati Sindhu civilization and now we find another as developed and probable Vedic civilization in Sinauli it's further excavation might change the way we look at Indian Prehistory)

People here followed different rules, had different cultures worshipped different Gods and yet connected with each other probably due to the continuity of civilization

In short India was a land of unity in diversity even in prehistoric times.

Unlike what we feel not everyone was a Vedic follower, while the lineage of Purus and the descendants of Mandhaata followed Vedas, others were not so much interested in that (I don't think Yayati was an historical figure, he in my opinion was a mythological person added later to give a common ancestory to all major tribes of the Vedas. Anus for example was definitely a Mesopotamian or Sumerian group not much to do with India most probably some of them migrated here and established a land)

Anyhow coming to the topic as the Vedic follower kings were gaining power, they started to patronise the Vedic sages all the more who now wanted to establish the supremacy of Vedas even in non Vedic lands, therefore started establishing their ashrams in the borders of areas where non Vedic followers lived. Chanted Vedic mantras and tried to woo more followers (something like what the Christian missionaries do today). This is something what the kings among non Vedic followers didn't like much and they therefore tried to stop these rituals in their land by some pouring non acceptable items into their Yagyakundas. Please check that's all they mostly did, hardly we have examples of Rakshas or Daityas killing the sages (excluding a few). This was presented as some kind of attrocities onto the sages and they asked for support from their patron kings (like Vishwamitra did from Dashrath) and the in disguise of saving their Dharma and sages rights, the Vedic partronisers attacked the kings/chiefs of those groups and killed them(it's not that they always won they would have certainly lost too, but those are generally ignored since we mostly have the texts from their side ) .

As a part of similar saving of Dharma, Ram and Lakshman had killed multiple non Vedic followers (Chhiillli listed above) and they were propagating their rituals to non Vedics even during the Vanwaas.

Ravan being the biggest and most powerful among the non Vedic follower groups (don't get confused when Ravan is called Vedic scholar because in the language of those who wrote these texts Vedas meant scriptures filled with knowledge which every group would have had for themselves. Just like we read the words like Hindu priests for Pandit ji or Hinduon ka Roza for vrat today) was definitely not happy at these happenings. Things would have had happened anyway, but the actions of Shurpnakha/Meenakshi just expedited the process..

P.S. I had once interacted with a Srilankan Buddhist online who said that they respect Ravan a lot as he had developed this region (although I really doubt if the Lanka of Ramayana is the same as Srilanka but just giving the view he gave) Aside he said that Lakshman had actually r**ed Shurpnakha and the supposed chopping off nose (naak kata di) was metaphorical (izzat chali gayi) no idea if it has any scriptural references or supports but this is what he said

Completely off topic and entirely unrelated but just thought of sharing it here (hopefully I don't get a warning for this)

Sorry mods allow it for once

Just saw an interview of BRC Mahabharatha cast and they were narrating the off screen instances.

So they told that Puneet Issar was a complete glutton and used to reach the food stalls first and finish everything he liked before others could reach. One day he got late for some reason and meanwhile Virendra Razdaan (who played Vidur) had taken all the remaining non veg items there were none left by the time Puneet came to the food stalls excluding the ones on Virendra ji's plate.

Having seen this Pankaj Dheer who ironically was Puneet's best friend slowly hinted him and reached out to Virendra ji and asked him about Kashmir (Virendra ji was a Kashmiri Pandit who unfortunately was forced to leave him homeland due to militancy), so he got emotional and starting narrating the instances and got completely lost into the conversation.

Meanwhile Puneet Issar slowly took all the non veg items from his plate and replaced them with brinjal

Not sure why but this narration actually made me imagine Karna actually doing something like this to Vidur to benefit Duryodhan

I know faltu post tha but aise hi 😆😆😆

A lot of people have this misconception that Rakshas Yakshas and Nagas were non vedic.

They were absolutely not.

First of all same as Hinduism today during bedic times too, scriptural practices, prayers rituals amd culture differred but not so much as to be separate

For eg. Let's take Hindu marriage rituals, lighting fire, chanting mantras, bride, groom and their parents making oblations/ahuti into the fire, taking oath of marriage, seven steps or circumambulations around the fire is the basic process across all Hindus, but it differs in how this basic process is followed across in each state. Kerala the whole thing takes 1 hour. Neighbour Tamil Nadu it takes 3 days. Punjab 3 hours but in the night. Karnataka 3 hours in early morning.

But do we say Only one set of people from one state are Hindus and others are not

Same way Rakshas Nagas Asuras and Yakshas along with Adityas (Suryavanshi) and Chandravansi all of them were Vedic.

Pulastya has contributed hymns to the vedas. He was the chief rishi of Rakshasa and Yaksha.

Sukracharya was the chief of Asuras and he has several vedic hymns to his credit.

Ravana learned Vedas from his father Vishrava who was son of Pulastya.

Non vedic people do existed at that time and they were called mleccha. They occur several times in puranas and epics as tradesmen (doing business with vedic kingdoms) as well as in war stories as mercenaries (army for hire)

In MB war both sides had mleccha mercenaries and Shikhandi was the general of non vedic mercenaries on Pandvaa side.

What happened with Rama and Ravana was strictly political. Fight over right to rule the Indian subcontinent.

Also note Rishi does not mean priest or preacher. Priest is one who conducts yagyas, preacher spread the word of God to masses in a way they understand. In Hindu mythology this role was taken over by the Suta community. Content was provided by Vyasa.

Agastya was a full time chemist as per puranas, he is supppsed to have come up distillation process to convert filthy water to pure water as per charaka samhita. His wife lopamudra was a princess though

Vishwamitra was a Rajarishi. He continued remaining a king had sons who inherited his kingdom. Only when he retired di he become a full time rishi.

I'll give one more example of Meghnad doing a fire yagna (vedic yagna) for their family deity nikumbha devi (a form of parvati) before the war.

What really used to happen was what Arjuna and Krishna did with Agni in the guise of Brahmin in Khandavprastha.

To occupy Rakshas or Naga teritory, brahmins and rishis in the name of doing divine service do yagya and set fire to the forests to chase these people out. They would not attack with big armies on their main cities. They would encroach forests in the border areas by burning them down and pushing the nagas and rakshas inner and inner into their kindom.

Vivaswan started with Pratishthan one city which is modern day prayag and burned and converted land to agriculture use across Ganga river and his descendents went all the way till Hastinapur on Yamuna banks.

Rakshas to protect their lands would douse those fires and and pour water over the yagya kund.

Ravana was a bad guy. But not all rakshas were neither were nagas.

The suryavanshi and chandra vanshi kings who won distorted the story to paint themselves as saviours of Dharma and Rakshas and Nagas as evil, cannibals, or people who bit other humans to death.

Nagas were not snakes. Rakshas were not cannibals and vanars were not monkeys. And none of them was non vedic

https://twitter.com/StarBharat/status/1367862400309817347

So Shiva ji is re-entering the show. I think time to restart watching this show

Thanks Chhiillli, what I had read was different and I stated that.

Obviously Nagas and Vanars weren't animals but most probably they were the followers of Snake and Ape totems. We have found the idols of Monkey Gods dated as old as 5000 BCE which excited Hindu supremacist, however we might be sure that rest assured that couldn't be of Hanuman since we know Hanuman worship isn't that old, that means there was a group who worshipped monkeys. Hanuman, Nal Nil, Bali Sugreev probably belonged to the same group and were therefore addressed as Vanars. Nagas could be the same too

The mallechas IIRC were not just non Vedic followers but also those who didn't know Sansksrit/any derivative of PIE and were comparatively less civilized. Else I haven't encountered a book which even called Charvakas (who clearly rejected Vedas or any possibility of God) as Mallechas. The Dharmic society didn't need Vedas to be mandate. The mallechas were those who were out of Dharma and were without any Darshan.

But now that you said I would read more.

About Rishis agreed they weren't just religious people but mostly mathematicians/scientists. Baudhadhayan ji a great Rishi was a mathematician and a historian, Agasthya as you said was a chemist but definitely he was also propagater of Vedas, the Puranas are clear that did the Prachar of Vedas in the Dakshin after Shivji gave him the knowledge of Tamil (funny enough this story resembles that of the disciples of Jesus who all started speaking strange language after death of Christ)

By the way have any one of you read Srikant Talegiri ji. He is not an academician but a Sanskrit scholar his research papers rejecting AIT actually created some ripples in academic world and many big names tried to refute him. He was offered a scholarship in Cambridge for PhD if he agrees to AIT but he rejected that. His works are good if someone is interested

By the way any one on that conspiracy theory that Lakshman didn't chop off the nose of Shrupnakha but actually r**ed her.

We still use the proverb Naak kaat diya for someone who takes away the honour (and those days the female honour was connected to this)

Ram asking and Lakshman cutting of surpanaka's nose makes no logical sense

If Surpanaka attacked Sita was a threat to her life, logic dictates that Lakshman would either kill her or cut her arms.

Cutting of surpanakas nose and ears (ears were also cut) was only for the sake of humiliating surpanaka not protecting sita.

Sita was still in danger infact more now as vengeful surpanaka could easily come back and attack sita when rama and lakshmana were not around because she still had hands and feet intact.

Not trying to harm a woman being a good man card doesnt work as they both had themselves killed her sister Tadaka

Rama and Lakshmana were not protecting Sita

Rama and Lakshmana were not preventing surpanaka from causing any harm

Rama and Lakshmana first mocked surpanaka passing her to each other telling her to go an marry the other.

FiNally humiliate her by disfiguring her.

She was a beautiful woman. Her being ugly scary demon is nonsense. Lakshman disfigured her face.

Why did he do that....you can draw your own conclusions.

My opinion.....

They were sending a message / challenge to Ravana... Goading him to attack... See what we had done to your sister...think what we are going to do to your family and you.

Himmat hai to aa yahan lanka se....types....

Ravana fell for the trap and kidnapped sita. Giving Rama the moral justification to attack him. Not that he needed any as the Rishis were already doing propanaganda for him as saviour of dharma

^^^ This👍👍👍

Abduction of Seeta was the biggest mistake of Ravan which gave Ram a moral high ground to the extent that they got a sob story for themselves. Like two helpless men lost their wives. But then Ravan was challenged by this action such a brutal attack on his sister, he couldn't have completely let it go, he had to respond to it in some way. Even in today's time killing a person is considered a lesser war crime than mutilation of someone, but since this was done by Lakshman & endrosed by Ram, we have to believe it was ok.

I don't believe in that Rambha shap/curse that Ravan would burn on attacking a non willing girl, and hence the mere fact that he kept Seeta protected and didn't disfigure her (forget everything else), goes to show he wasn't as bad as he was later made to become.

Also I don't believe that Bharat or Ayodhya wouldn't have got any information that Seeta is missing. Bharat was a doting brother, he would have in any case kept track on Ram Lakshman Seeta. If he didn't proactively participate in Seeta's search then that means that somehow or other they knew where Seeta was and were looking for more supporters closer to Lanka and felt that having a friendly state between theirs and Lanka in form of Kishkindha could be beneficial to them

I guess Radha Krishna is the first ever serial where they show Lord Shiva as some sort of a clown. I watched today's episode today after ages and they literally turned Mahadev into a dumb weirdo.