Doubts and Discussions from the Ramayan - Page 33

Originally posted by: Vibhishna

Yes, there are several mentions of non - vegetarian food in the Valmiki Ramayan. When Ram, Sita and Lakshman establish their home in Chitrakoot, they offer cooked meat (vension - deer meat) to the Gods and perform the ceremony of entering the house. It is mentioned that Sita Devi herself cooked it. Again, when Bharat comes to meet Ram after the death of King Dashrath, he tells Shathrugan that he can see the strips of dried meat and skin hung out on trees and poles made ready to use in the winter season. He says that this must be a sign that the home where the 3 of them stay must be nearby.

Ages and ages ago, all people ate all kinds of food and drank liquors too. It was after the Rishi Sukracharya was deceived by the Asuras and made to eat Kacha's flesh that he cursed that any Brahman who touches wine would be sent to hell.

It was sage Agasthya who cursed that any Brahman who ate flesh will go to hell or rather he vowed that no Brahman should touch meat. This was after the Vatapi - Ilvala incident.

I hope this was helpful.

Originally posted by: Chandraketu

Rama worshipping Durga b4 the final battle is not there in Valmiki, but is there in Krittivas, which is yet another twist to the story. But in Valmiki, Indra never appears before Rama b4 the war, and even when sending Matali, he just sends Matali, rather than go himself.

Originally posted by: rajnish_here

There is different way in which different scholars interpreted the original verses of scriptures. Few interpretaion say that Ram does eat meat and few do not, I have Gita press version which do not mentions about Ram being non-veg, but few did, but in that case also Ram eating meat is not wrong. Ram was kshatriya and in those time kshatriya does eat non-veg, Ram though incarnation is human and he led his life in the way humans do. King doing hunting and enjoying non-veg is justified through shashtras and in this way if Ram ate meat it is justified. Non veg comes under royan dinner or Rashri aahar and nothing wrong in this
there had been debate on this before too-
https://india-forums.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=1098418

Originally posted by: ananyacool

There was a discussion going on Sangam texts, Is Sila-pathikaram a part of sangam text? If Iam not wrong it includes the story of MaNimekhalai, the daughter of Kovalan. Also many songs of Rama as Vishnu are written it ??

Can anybody give some info?

Originally posted by: chen2chic

Silapathikaram is one of the Five great epics in Tamil Literature. But am not sure if it finds places in Sangam texts..

I think some of the sangam texts are Tholkaappiam, Patthupaattu, Ettu thogai nool etc. Do not know the complete list though.

I think Manimekhalai is a different story, though ehr parents were Kovalan & Madhavi in Silapathikaram.

And thats my 100th post. oohoooooo😛

Originally posted by: chen2chic

And regarding your exit question:

As per what I have heard about the story of Kaushalya - it is said that Kaushalya's father did not have any sons and thus handed over his kingdom of Kosal to Dasaratha during Dasaratha-Kaushalya's wedding. Dasaratha's ancestral kingdom was Avadh with Ayodhya as its capital. So I'm guessing the two kingdoms merged to be called Kosal desh, with Ayodhya as their capital.

And probably Kausalya's father also passed away so there was no place Rama had to go.

And for Sumitra, she had already entrusted Lakshman & Shatrughan to Rama & Bharat respectively, so probably they two would not go anywhere on their own.

Btw, is Sumitra from Magadh or Kashi?

Which account had this - about Dasharath inheriting Kaushalya's kingdom? Besides, her Kosala was completely different - it was called Dakshin Kaushal. That's today's Chattisgarh, which is nowhere near Avadh. So they couldn't have merged 2 such kingdoms for administrative reasons. Also, it's unclear whether Bhanuman (1-13-26) was Kaushalya's father or brother. As for Sumitra, the verse 1-13-26 has both Kosala and Magadh in the same sentence. The ACK Dasharath has Sumitra as being a princess of Magadh, but you may be right about Sumitra being from Kashi.

More likely, Dasharath had an alliance with Kekaya, but a very lukewarm relationship with both Kosala-desha and Magadh.

P.S. Chen2chic, congratulations on 100, and Ananya, congratulations on 500!!! Way to go!

Originally posted by: Chandraketu

Which account had this - about Dasharath inheriting Kaushalya's kingdom? Besides, her Kosala was completely different - it was called Dakshin Kaushal. That's today's Chattisgarh, which is nowhere near Avadh. So they couldn't have merged 2 such kingdoms for administrative reasons. Also, it's unclear whether Bhanuman (1-13-26) was Kaushalya's father or brother. As for Sumitra, the verse 1-13-26 has both Kosala and Magadh in the same sentence. The ACK Dasharath has Sumitra as being a princess of Magadh, but you may be right about Sumitra being from Kashi.

More likely, Dasharath had an alliance with Kekaya, but a very lukewarm relationship with both Kosala-desha and Magadh.

P.S. Chen2chic, congratulations on 100, and Ananya, congratulations on 500!!! Way to go!

Originally posted by: Chandraketu

Which account had this - about Dasharath inheriting Kaushalya's kingdom? Besides, her Kosala was completely different - it was called Dakshin Kaushal. That's today's Chattisgarh, which is nowhere near Avadh. So they couldn't have merged 2 such kingdoms for administrative reasons. Also, it's unclear whether Bhanuman (1-13-26) was Kaushalya's father or brother. As for Sumitra, the verse 1-13-26 has both Kosala and Magadh in the same sentence. The ACK Dasharath has Sumitra as being a princess of Magadh, but you may be right about Sumitra being from Kashi.

More likely, Dasharath had an alliance with Kekaya, but a very lukewarm relationship with both Kosala-desha and Magadh.

P.S. Chen2chic, congratulations on 100, and Ananya, congratulations on 500!!! Way to go!

Originally posted by: chen2chic

Your point on Mandavi & Shrutkirti accompanying Bharat & Shatrughan is defnitely acceptable. So all chances the two ladies were not present at Ayodhya at the time of Ram's exile.

And regarding your exit question:

As per what I have heard about the story of Kaushalya - it is said that Kaushalya's father did not have any sons and thus handed over his kingdom of Kosal to Dasaratha during Dasaratha-Kaushalya's wedding. Dasaratha's ancestral kingdom was Avadh with Ayodhya as its capital. So I'm guessing the two kingdoms merged to be called Kosal desh, with Ayodhya as their capital.

And probably Kausalya's father also passed away so there was no place Rama had to go.

And for Sumitra, she had already entrusted Lakshman & Shatrughan to Rama & Bharat respectively, so probably they two would not go anywhere on their own.

Btw, is Sumitra from Magadh or Kashi?