Doubts and Discussions from the Ramayan - Page 115

Can you verify 3 things for me from your Gita Press Valmiki book:

1. What was the total time Rama ruled when Sita too was maharani, and total time he ruled after? 7:42 says 10000 for the former, and 7:99 says 10000 for the latter. But wouldn't that make his reign 20000 years?

Total time he ruled with Sita before her Vanvas: 2 years. "In this way while both Sri Sita and Sri Rama revelled for long (in the Ashoka Vatika he builds for Sitaji in Ayodhya) the auspicious winter season which always provides enjoyment came to an end (i.e. 1 year passes) When the couple had relished a variety of enjoyments, the advent of another winter became an event of the past. (i.e the 2nd winter passed). They were together for 2 years and towards the end of the 2nd year she becomes pregnant.

This is what Kaal says to Ramji when he is telling him that it is time to leave.

"O best in the world, You had set your mind on having a human form, desirous to kill Ravana,...You fixed the span of your stay among the mortals for 10100 years....The span of your stay on earth as human being is complete and now it is time for you to come back to us."

2. In 7:91-98, there is no mention of a golden statue of Sita: the first reference to it is 7:99, after Sita's passing. Can you confirm whether Rama had Sita's statue installed in her place in that particular yagna, where she ultimately took her vow? Related - can you confirm whether Rama was asked by anyone to re-marry?

There is no mention of anyone asking Ramji to get married again in Valmiki.

Yes, the statue was installed because Ramji says this when giving orders to Lakshmana for the preparation of the Asvamedha " May Bharata proceed (to the banks of the Gomati river where the Yagna was performed) carrying coins in many hundred millions of gold and silver, carefully. Many rows of mobile markets, all actors and dancers, cooks, many damsels possessed of eternal charm, may they accompany Bharata; the citizens both young and aged ones, Brahmanas with firm resolve, the laborers, carpenters, treasurers, and knowers of Veda, all my mothers, the spouses of my brothers, the gold statue of my wife Sita...may proceed...

3. Also, I have never found any reference in Valmiki to Rama taking a vow of ek-patni. Can you confirm whether it's actually there or not?

I flipped through the pages and I did not see any mention of Rama taking the vow of eka-patni. I might have missed it because I did not read each and every line. What I did get is that the ek-patni vow is implied throughout the epic. Rama never thinks of anyone else, does not get attracted by anyone else, is not interested in anyone else except Sita. The implication is there throughout that he is very happy with just his wife Sita and does not need anyone else. This implication is there in the Uttarkhand also. There is no one but Sita on his mind in Uttarkhand. This is true for Bharat, Lakshman, and Shatrughan too with their respective wives. They don't seem too interested in other women, princesses or otherwise. So, I am going to interpret it as eka-patni vrat.

If someone has a reference to this from Valmiki, please post it.

Khalrika

Thanks. Follow-up questions:

Originally posted by: Khalrika

Chandra, the answer to ur questions:

Khalrika

Can you verify 3 things for me from your Gita Press Valmiki book:

1. What was the total time Rama ruled when Sita too was maharani, and total time he ruled after? 7:42 says 10000 for the former, and 7:99 says 10000 for the latter. But wouldn't that make his reign 20000 years?

Total time he ruled with Sita before her Vanvas: 2 years. "In this way while both Sri Sita and Sri Rama revelled for long (in the Ashoka Vatika he builds for Sitaji in Ayodhya) the auspicious winter season which always provides enjoyment came to an end (i.e. 1 year passes) When the couple had relished a variety of enjoyments, the advent of another winter became an event of the past. (i.e the 2nd winter passed). They were together for 2 years and towards the end of the 2nd year she becomes pregnant.

Two? Does it have a verse reference? I have a description of 7:42 which goes:

{After sending Pushpak off, Raam came to His Beautiful Ashok Vaatikaa. Raam got very please the Sandal, Arun, mango, Paarijaat, Madaar, Kadamb, Jaamun, pomegranate trees which were blooming and were laden with fruits. There were several ponds with Sphatik (a kind of stone) stairs and blooming lotus flowers. Many flowers had fallen on the ground, and they looked like star in the sky. Raam ate many sweet fruits. At that time Kinnar and Apsaraa came there to sing and dance.

Thus Raam enjoyed life with Seetaa for 10,000 years. He used to spend day's first Prahar in religious activities, second one with Seetaa Jee. Seetaa also spent Her first Prahar in religious activities and serving mothers-in-law and second Prahar in the service of Raam. After some time, Seetaa got pregnant, then Raam said to Her happily - "At this time when you are pregnant, whatever your desire is, tell me, I will fulfill it." Seetaa said - "I have an intense desire to greet great gracious Rishi's lotus feet. Please permit me to go there for one night." Raam said - "To fulfill your desire I will definitely send you Tapovan tomorrow." Then He went to somewhere else with His people.}

Originally posted by: Khalrika

This is what Kaal says to Ramji when he is telling him that it is time to leave.

"O best in the world, You had set your mind on having a human form, desirous to kill Ravana,...You fixed the span of your stay among the mortals for 10100 years....The span of your stay on earth as human being is complete and now it is time for you to come back to us."

Okay, thanks for this reference. My 7:104 simply had 10000.

Originally posted by: Khalrika

2. In 7:91-98, there is no mention of a golden statue of Sita: the first reference to it is 7:99, after Sita's passing. Can you confirm whether Rama had Sita's statue installed in her place in that particular yagna, where she ultimately took her vow? Related - can you confirm whether Rama was asked by anyone to re-marry?

There is no mention of anyone asking Ramji to get married again in Valmiki.

Yes, the statue was installed because Ramji says this when giving orders to Lakshmana for the preparation of the Asvamedha " May Bharata proceed (to the banks of the Gomati river where the Yagna was performed) carrying coins in many hundred millions of gold and silver, carefully. Many rows of mobile markets, all actors and dancers, cooks, many damsels possessed of eternal charm, may they accompany Bharata; the citizens both young and aged ones, Brahmanas with firm resolve, the laborers, carpenters, treasurers, and knowers of Veda, all my mothers, the spouses of my brothers, the gold statue of my wife Sita...may proceed...

Thanks for revealing this one. 7:91?

Originally posted by: Khalrika

3. Also, I have never found any reference in Valmiki to Rama taking a vow of ek-patni. Can you confirm whether it's actually there or not?

I flipped through the pages and I did not see any mention of Rama taking the vow of eka-patni. I might have missed it because I did not read each and every line. What I did get is that the ek-patni vow is implied throughout the epic. Rama never thinks of anyone else, does not get attracted by anyone else, is not interested in anyone else except Sita. The implication is there throughout that he is very happy with just his wife Sita and does not need anyone else. This implication is there in the Uttarkhand also. There is no one but Sita on his mind in Uttarkhand. This is true for Bharat, Lakshman, and Shatrughan too with their respective wives. They don't seem too interested in other women, princesses or otherwise. So, I am going to interpret it as eka-patni vrat.

If someone has a reference to this from Valmiki, please post it.

Thanks for providing this. I actually do believe that they were all committed to being monogamous, but I was interested in which occasion, if any, did they actually commit themselves to it. I didn't find it anywhere in Valmiki, and therefore was concluding that Rama never took such a vow but was nonetheless committed to staying loyal to Sita, and moreover, that there was never any pressure on him to re-marry, contrary to what's likely to be shown.

Originally posted by: Chandraketu

Khalrika

Thanks. Follow-up questions:

Two? Does it have a verse reference? I have a description of 7:42 which goes:

{After sending Pushpak off, Raam came to His Beautiful Ashok Vaatikaa. Raam got very please the Sandal, Arun, mango, Paarijaat, Madaar, Kadamb, Jaamun, pomegranate trees which were blooming and were laden with fruits. There were several ponds with Sphatik (a kind of stone) stairs and blooming lotus flowers. Many flowers had fallen on the ground, and they looked like star in the sky. Raam ate many sweet fruits. At that time Kinnar and Apsaraa came there to sing and dance.

Thus Raam enjoyed life with Seetaa for 10,000 years. He used to spend day's first Prahar in religious activities, second one with Seetaa Jee. Seetaa also spent Her first Prahar in religious activities and serving mothers-in-law and second Prahar in the service of Raam. After some time, Seetaa got pregnant, then Raam said to Her happily - "At this time when you are pregnant, whatever your desire is, tell me, I will fulfill it." Seetaa said - "I have an intense desire to greet great gracious Rishi's lotus feet. Please permit me to go there for one night." Raam said - "To fulfill your desire I will definitely send you Tapovan tomorrow." Then He went to somewhere else with His people.}

Okay, thanks for this reference. My 7:104 simply had 10000.

Thanks for revealing this one. 7:91?

Thanks for providing this. I actually do believe that they were all committed to being monogamous, but I was interested in which occasion, if any, did they actually commit themselves to it. I didn't find it anywhere in Valmiki, and therefore was concluding that Rama never took such a vow but was nonetheless committed to staying loyal to Sita, and moreover, that there was never any pressure on him to re-marry, contrary to what's likely to be shown.

Vibs

Very good question. I think it only applied to Rama, and would only be valid if Sita, but not UMS, were avatars of Lakshmi (although there is a school of opinion that considers that they were). Bhrigu didn't curse Vishnu that he'd be separated from wives he took during the incarnation who were not Lakshmi. Also, Bhrigu's curse is only active during Sita's exile, and not during her capture by Ravan. Nor is it activated during Lakshman-Urmila separation.

Of course, in today's episode, they showed Vishnu & Lakshmi still enjoying themselves on Sesha even as Rama and Sita were undergoing their pain of separation. Very bizzare depiction, as I mentioned in the other post in the Discussions thread.

Also, in Valmiki, there is nothing about Bharat & Mandavi living separately - I've only seen that in the Ramayan serials. In fact, I wonder whether even Tulsidas had that - I'd have to check. Can you confirm what Kamban says on this?

One small point - on the nectar partition, Rama was the first 1/2, Lakshman the next 1/4, Bharat the next 1/8 and Shatrughan the remaining 1/8. Dasharath could only do binary divisions 😆😆😆 For this reason, I used to think that Lakshman was #2 of the bros, until I found out otherwise, courtesy Chen.

One more problem I have with Bhrigu's curse - it seemed to punish Sita even more than it punished Rama, even though Lakshmi wasn't the one guilty of that crime. Shouldn't curses have been targeted to not have collateral damage?

Originally posted by: loveanime

I actually have a question about that whole episode of Vishnu killing that woman. It seems soooo cold did he have to do that. I thought Vishnu was all forgiving why does he have to kill to get past her what powers did she have to stop him or is it some protection she gave the demons. He could have send that chakra thing wizzing past her even if she refused to move.

Khalrika

Since the rakshashas had surrendered themselves to Kyathi/Usha, Vishnu should have sat on a negotiating table with her 😆😆😆 and worked out terms and conditions of them being allowed to survive:

- Commitment to living a life of dharma and not violating people or harrassing devas

- Laying down their arms completely

- Living under the supervision of Indra

That was a good third alternative, which would have spared Vishnu the sin of brahmhatya and strihatya in 1 go. 😆😆😆