Lord Ram's date of birth & year

Page

Next Last

ritu

@Siyaram bhakt

Inactive

Posted: 16 years ago

Lord Ram was born on 10 January,5114 BC

Quote

Frequent Posters

Janaki

@RamKiSeeta

Achiever

+ 6

Posted: 16 years ago

😉Thank you Siyaram Bhakt for this very useful information! 😉

Quote

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

Huduga

@Huduga

Inactive

Posted: 16 years ago

i am curious abt it

Edited by Huduga - 16 years ago

Quote

ritu

@Siyaram bhakt

Inactive

Posted: 16 years ago

i got this news from wikipedia & it said Lord Ram is for real!!

Quote

bhopalyellow

@bhopalyellow

Navigator

Posted: 16 years ago

thanks dear....i heard it some time back in news also.....😊

Quote

Huduga

@Huduga

Inactive

Posted: 16 years ago

Wikipedia shud not be trusted too much too.

bcoz it is an open project.

Edited by Huduga - 16 years ago

Quote

Huduga

@Huduga

Inactive

Posted: 16 years ago

Originally posted by: godisone
I believe in this book.

then maybe u want to change this answer in ur quiz..😊

========
1. is it true, that Shri Ram ruled for another 11 thousand years after coming from fight.

1. Yes, it's true, because in the Treta-Yug, life span was veeeeeerrryyy long, and in the beginning of Ramayan, it says that Dasharath was hundreds of years old.

========

Quote

Vrish

@Vr15h

Stunner

+ 6

Posted: 16 years ago

Wikipedia is worthless - since one can edit anything one doesn't like. But the date shown above seems for real - both Ramayan and Mahabharat would have had to have occurred several thousand years BC.

Rama was the 64th ruler of the Ikshvaku dynasty, and there were several after him. I however wonder whether those who succeeded Brihadbala (Abhimanyu's adversary, and the ruler of Kosala during the dwapar yuga) were his descendants?

Edited by Chandraketu - 16 years ago

Quote

Vrish

@Vr15h

Stunner

+ 6

Posted: 16 years ago

On the 11000 year old tradition (actually Valmiki mentions 10000 years), one would have to take that as a metaphorical, rather than as a chronologically accurate literal data point. After all, Valmiki liberally sprinkles that 10000 year number throughout his account of the Uttarkand - even Sita's reign as queen was 10000 years, and after that, Rama again ruled 10000 years.

Besides, if Rama was born in 5114BC and ruled for 10000 or 11000 years, then he'd still be among us - and I mean physically, not just spiritually. So one has to accept that a good deal of what was written was metaphorical.

The timelines of what happened seem to be much briefer:

16 years - Rama kills Taraka, marries Sita. Sita is then 14.
12 years - Rama & Sita live happily in Ayodhya
14 years - Rama, Sita & Lakshman are in exile
12 years - Sita is exiled again, and next 12 years, lives in Valmiki's ashram

After that period, there is the Ashwamedha yagna, Sita passes on to Rasootal and after some years, the rajmatas die. Bharat conquers Gandhara and puts his sons on the throne, Rama & Lakshman conquer Karupathadesh and put Lakshman's sons on the throne, Lakshman gives up his life when Rama is forced to disown him, Rama, after being turned down by Bharat, installs Kush on the throne, and they all return to Vaikuntha.

Anyway, adding the above numbers, looks like Rama was in his mid 50s when he decided to leave the world (maybe older, but not 10000 years; the rajmatas probably died sometime after that). Once Ravan was killed, establishing dharma and making the earth an utopian place to live would have been pretty trivial for an avatar of Narayan.

Edited by Chandraketu - 16 years ago