connections b/w ramayan n mahabharat - Page 2

rupali, here is the info regarding vaali's connection 2 mahabharat.

In Rama's incarnation, He addressed Himself as son of Dasharatha, not as son of Kausalya, because he did not want His two other mothers to get disappointed. He also followed the traditional method of introducing himself through the paternal lineage. Valmiki however addresses Rama as 'Kausalya Supraja Rama' and the story continues……… In this Shloka also Vyasa addresses Krishna as Vasudeva Suta (son of Vasudeva). Rama, being incarnation of Vishnu is aware of everything that is happening, yet He cries for Seeta. He requests the trees, the clouds, the birds and everything that He comes across to tell Him the whereabouts of Seeta. Why this hardship to the almighty? Why should Krishna end His incarnation by the arrow of an archer? Vali (Sugriva's brother) who was killed by the arrow of Rama fired from behind a tree, wishes to kill Rama in the same way. Rama fulfils his wish in the incarnation of Krishna, when Vali is reborn as the archer who hits the arrow to Krishna's toe mistaking it to be an animal. The answer to such paradoxical situations is simple and clear. All these are pre-planned. It is all in accordance with the divine plan that squares many equations. This is not hardship at all

*king*

Originally posted by: *king*

rupali, here is the info regarding vaali's connection 2 mahabharat.

In Rama's incarnation, He addressed Himself as son of Dasharatha, not as son of Kausalya, because he did not want His two other mothers to get disappointed. He also followed the traditional method of introducing himself through the paternal lineage. Valmiki however addresses Rama as 'Kausalya Supraja Rama' and the story continues??? In this Shloka also Vyasa addresses Krishna as Vasudeva Suta (son of Vasudeva). Rama, being incarnation of Vishnu is aware of everything that is happening, yet He cries for Seeta. He requests the trees, the clouds, the birds and everything that He comes across to tell Him the whereabouts of Seeta. Why this hardship to the almighty? Why should Krishna end His incarnation by the arrow of an archer? Vali (Sugriva's brother) who was killed by the arrow of Rama fired from behind a tree, wishes to kill Rama in the same way. Rama fulfils his wish in the incarnation of Krishna, when Vali is reborn as the archer who hits the arrow to Krishna's toe mistaking it to be an animal. The answer to such paradoxical situations is simple and clear. All these are pre-planned. It is all in accordance with the divine plan that squares many equations. This is not hardship at all

*king*

5. Hanuman was always present on the flag of the chariot (RATH) of Arjun during Mahabharata war..

King,
Some stories say that Vali was reborn as Jara and some say that Angad was reborn as Jara.
However, neither of these two stories is mentioned in the epic Mahabharat.

King

Thanks for these posts. Some interesting parallels/contrasts between the 2 epics (I'm also tossing in Rama and Krishna comparisons into the mix):

In the Ramayan, the son of Surya (Sugriv) caused the death of the son of Indra (Vali). In the Mahabharat, the son of Indra (Arjun) killed the son of Surya (Karna).

In the Ramayan, Lakshmi-avatar Sita got Vishnu avatar Rama all to herself. In the Mahabharat, Lakshmi-avatar Rukmini had to share her Vishnu avatar Krishna with 16107 other co-wives.

In the Ramayan, Jaya/Vijaya's cursed incarnation (Ravan) got to abduct a married Lakshmi-avatar (Sita) and keep her captive for several months. In the Mahabharat, Jaya/Vijaya's cursed incarnation (Shishupala) tried to capture and marry Lakshmi-avatar (Rukmini) against her will, but failed miserably.

In the Ramayan, Sita after giving birth to her babies got to enjoy parenting them for the next 12 years. Rukmini, otoh, lost Pradyumna who was kidnapped by an asura Shambara, and he didn't return to her until years later after marrying Mayavati.

In the Ramayan, Vishwamitra was a well wisher of Rama & his guru during the fight against Taraka. In the Mahabharat, Vishwamitra was among the rishis who cursed the Yadavas that they would be destroyed.

In the Ramayan, Ravan & Kumbhakarna were the most powerful rakshashas in their era, and vassals of no one. In the Mahabharat, Kamsa and Shishupala were both vassals of Jarasandha (so was Dantavakra, if one believes that Shishupala and Dantavakra were the incarnations.)

In the Ramayan, Rama's sons and nephews survived and suceeded him as kings of various kingdoms. In the Mahabharat, all of Krishnas sons were massacred - none got to suceed him. (Similarly, Ayodhya survived Rama, but Dwaraka was submerged after the passing of Krishna).

I'll think up more as I go along

Originally posted by: Chandraketu

King

Thanks for these posts. Some interesting parallels/contrasts between the 2 epics (I'm also tossing in Rama and Krishna comparisons into the mix):

In the Ramayan, the son of Surya (Sugriv) caused the death of the son of Indra (Vali). In the Mahabharat, the son of Indra (Arjun) killed the son of Surya (Karna).

In the Ramayan, Lakshmi-avatar Sita got Vishnu avatar Rama all to herself. In the Mahabharat, Lakshmi-avatar Rukmini had to share her Vishnu avatar Krishna with 16107 other co-wives.

In the Ramayan, Jaya/Vijaya's cursed incarnation (Ravan) got to abduct a married Lakshmi-avatar (Sita) and keep her captive for several months. In the Mahabharat, Jaya/Vijaya's cursed incarnation (Shishupala) tried to capture and marry Lakshmi-avatar (Rukmini) against her will, but failed miserably.

In the Ramayan, Sita after giving birth to her babies got to enjoy parenting them for the next 12 years. Rukmini, otoh, lost Pradyumna who was kidnapped by an asura Shambara, and he didn't return to her until years later after marrying Mayavati.

In the Ramayan, Vishwamitra was a well wisher of Rama & his guru during the fight against Taraka. In the Mahabharat, Vishwamitra was among the rishis who cursed the Yadavas that they would be destroyed.

In the Ramayan, Ravan & Kumbhakarna were the most powerful rakshashas in their era, and vassals of no one. In the Mahabharat, Kamsa and Shishupala were both vassals of Jarasandha (so was Dantavakra, if one believes that Shishupala and Dantavakra were the incarnations.)

In the Ramayan, Rama's sons and nephews survived and suceeded him as kings of various kingdoms. In the Mahabharat, all of Krishnas sons were massacred - none got to suceed him. (Similarly, Ayodhya survived Rama, but Dwaraka was submerged after the passing of Krishna).

I'll think up more as I go along

the king agrees wid most of ur points except the last. here is sum info abt krishna's sucessors.

Vajranabh,Lord Krishna's successor and great grandson,is believed to have built the present temple Dwarakanath,also called Trilok Sundar. Many Hindus fervently believe that the temple was erected in one night by a supernatural agency,under Vajranabh's direction. Legend has it that when dying,Lord Krishna asked his devotees to leave Swarnadwarika so that the sea could engulf it. Until this day,Lord Krishna's city lies buried under the sea. Excavations have revealed that the sea swallowed five settlements,the present-day Dwaraka being the sixth in line.

Shree Krishna's grandson and son of Pradhugmn, Prince Anirudh was married to daughter of King Banasur or Multan, Princess Usha. They had a son named Mrigketan. Yet another son of Banasur was Kou Bhand, who had a daughter named Rama. Thus, Usha was Rama's "bua". Once Rama had accompanied her bua Usha to Dwarika, Usha's sasural. Once arrived, Anirudh's Uncle, Sambh got attracted towards Rama and married her. They had a son named Ushneek or Ushaneer. Prince Kou Bhand became King after Banasur. But since he had no son, he called up Ushneek and make him the King of Sonitpur, the capital of Mistra. Many centuries later, one of the generations of King Ushneek, Devendra lost the kingdom to Nabi Mohammad and as a result his son, Prince Ugrasen was forced to convert to Islam. Prince Ugrasen was also known as Asvapati. Devendra's second son, Prince Gajpati came to Surat and established his own state. Gajpati's generations were known as "Chudasiya Yadavs". Devendra's third son, defeated Firozshah in Gazni and ruled thereafter. Devendra's fourth son ruled the states of Kacch and Sindh.

*king*

Originally posted by: rupalip

5. Hanuman was always present on the flag of the chariot (RATH) of Arjun during Mahabharata war..

Most of us know this but is there any specific reason behind?

Rupali, the king remembers vaguely the story he read in his childhood abt a bet b/w arjuna n hanuman regarding building a bridge. here is the full detail. hope it helps u.

Hanuman is Chiranjeevi - one who lives forever. Thus even as various eras passed by Hanuman was ever-present. He was also told that Lord Sriram would reappear as Lord Krishna at a future time. Thus Hanuman appears in the Mahabharata at two junctures - once to quell the pride of Bheema and the second time to see Lord Krishna.

Bheema was the brother of Hanuman in the sense that Bheema was also born as a result of a boon from Vayudeva. Once when the Pandava's were resting in the forest, a heavenly flower by name Sugandikapushpa floated through the air into the lap of Draupadi. Totally enchanted by its beauty and fragrance she asked Bheema to get some more flowers for her. Thus Bheema went in the direction in which the flower had flown. He found it in a lake belonging to Gandharvas (the court musicians of Lord Indra), after a fierce battle he was able to obtain the flowers. Thus triumphantly, Bheema headed back, proud of his strength. On his way back he found an aged monkey blocking his path, since it was the custom not to cross a living person, Bheema, his thoughts still swollen with pride, called out loud to the monkey to clear the path. The feeble monkey told him that it was too tired, it requested the powerful warrior to move it's tail aside. An arrogant Bheema could not budge the tail though he tried with all his might. Realizing his folly he apologized to the monkey. Seeing his arrogance quelled, the monkey returned to its original form; it was none other than Lord Hanuman who had come to subdue the pride of his brother.

Hanuman told Bheema, after the above-mentioned incident that he would appear on the flag of Arjuna's chariot. But I will relate the second story because it is here that Hanuman actually meets Lord Krishna.

In an argument between Hanuman and Arjuna, Arjuna claimed that he could reconstruct the bridge built by the Vanar army during Lord Sriram's war with Ravana using his archery skills. Hanuman laid the challenge that if Arjuna could build a bridge that could withstand his weight, let alone an army's, then he would be on the flag of Arjuna's chariot in the war. But should Arjuna fail it was decided that Arjuna would give up his life by entering a pyre. Arjuna built a bridge in a jiffy and when Hanuman stepped on it the whole bridge collapsed, Arjuna, immensely disappointed decided to end his life. At this moment Lord Krishna appeared and asked Arjuna to build the bridge again. After Arjuna rebuilt the bridge, Lord Krishna touched the bridge and asked Hanuman to walk over it. Despite his best efforts Hanuman could not break the bridge; at this instant Hanuman saw Lord Sriram in Krishna and was overcome with emotion. He promised to aid Arjuna in the war by being on the flag of Arjuna's chariot, thus stabilising and protecting it.

Hanumanji's flag signifies sense control and mind control that gives victory to the higher nature over the lower nature.

Arjuna's Chariot bursts into flames:

At the conclusion of the war (Shalya Parva), as soon as Lord Krishna and Lord Hanuman exit Arjuna's chariot, the chariot, along with the horses, instantly catches flames.

*king*

Originally posted by: *king*

the king agrees wid most of ur points except the last. here is sum info abt krishna's sucessors.

Vajranabh,Lord Krishna's successor and great grandson,is believed to have built the present temple Dwarakanath,also called Trilok Sundar. Many Hindus fervently believe that the temple was erected in one night by a supernatural agency,under Vajranabh's direction. Legend has it that when dying,Lord Krishna asked his devotees to leave Swarnadwarika so that the sea could engulf it. Until this day,Lord Krishna's city lies buried under the sea. Excavations have revealed that the sea swallowed five settlements,the present-day Dwaraka being the sixth in line.

Shree Krishna's grandson and son of Pradhugmn, Prince Anirudh was married to daughter of King Banasur or Multan, Princess Usha...

*king*

king

You are right about Krishna having descendents. However, my point was that whereas Rama's sons survived and succeeded him, Krishna's didn't. Even Anirudha was killed in that fracticide, and Vajra, who was the son of Anirudh & Usha, succeeded them.

Your signature comment about nobody being able to convert to Hinduism might be disputed by some pretty famous converts, most notably the late George Harrison. In CA, I've come across quite a few Western converts to Hinduism. Of course, that's no reason not to be proud of being a Hindu

Originally posted by: Chandraketu

king

You are right about Krishna having descendents. However, my point was that whereas Rama's sons survived and succeeded him, Krishna's didn't. Even Anirudha was killed in that fracticide, and Vajra, who was the son of Anirudh & Usha, succeeded them.

Your signature comment about nobody being able to convert to Hinduism might be disputed by some pretty famous converts, most notably the late George Harrison. In CA, I've come across quite a few Western converts to Hinduism. Of course, that's no reason not to be proud of being a Hindu

well although george harrison n others accepted hinduism. unlike christianity or islam hinduism is more than juzz a religion. its a way of life. every hindu has a gothra which is important. u don need a gothra as a christian or muslim but as a hindu gothra is needed whether 2 marry, or perform archana or puja in temple. well u may brush it off saying its not important but then each has their own POV.

*king*

here r a few more.

these r the characters in ramayan which were reborn in mahabharat