Doubts and Discussions from the Ramayan II - Page 41

Vibs

Welcome back. IPL ends on Sunday, so hopefully, your channel providers will give you back your Ramayan😊

Lalitha

Ananya's note on the Druyhu's was precisely what I read in The Vedic Age

Khalrika

My thoughts exactly. Ananya answered this question somewhat - in Balkand, the story of how Vishwamitra went from a King to a Brahmarshi is given in good detail - and during that story, he delayed every promotion he got - Rajarshi, Maharshi and finally Brahmarshi - by cursing a lot of people - Vashishtha's sons for refusing to attend his yagna for Trishanku, Rambha for seducing him and throwing a fit when the devas refused to recognize the alternate planetary system he created to rival theirs for spiteing him over Trishanku. He somehow held his temper w/ Maneka, who seduced him and w/ who he begat Shakuntala (therefore, she was born long before Rama was, although whether she married Dushyant in Treta yuga or Dwapar yuga is another question). Finally, he had to demonstrate that he had conquered all anger when he became a Brahmarshi. Notwithstanding, his temper tantrum at Dasharath for balking at parting w/ Rama was uncalled for.

However, aside from that, in his post Brahmarshi life, he rarely lost his temper - one rare occasion was the incident w/ Samba's cross-dressing. Ananya brought up a good point about Shakuntala, and what's more - if he was going to in one night flip over and praise Rama to the skies for exiling Sita, why lose your marbles over her exile in the first place?🤔

I have another question. Vishwamitra's temper is one thing. Does it seem likely that Rama, who generally was dedicated to dharma, would decide to end the life of another person for merely a slight - that too unintended - just because a Brahmin throws a temper tantrum? Was it so important to placate rishis that even lives of innocent people who Rishis were riled at was fair game?

This is another of those stories I just can't believe. Pretty much in the same league as the ones that have Rama asking Lakshman to abandon Sita in the middle of the forest, cut off her hand/ear, et al.

Originally posted by: Chandraketu

Vibs

Welcome back. IPL ends on Sunday, so hopefully, your channel providers will give you back your Ramayan😊

Lalitha

Ananya's note on the Druyhu's was precisely what I read in The Vedic Age

Khalrika

My thoughts exactly. Ananya answered this question somewhat - in Balkand, the story of how Vishwamitra went from a King to a Brahmarshi is given in good detail - and during that story, he delayed every promotion he got - Rajarshi, Maharshi and finally Brahmarshi - by cursing a lot of people - Vashishtha's sons for refusing to attend his yagna for Trishanku, Rambha for seducing him and throwing a fit when the devas refused to recognize the alternate planetary system he created to rival theirs for spiteing him over Trishanku. He somehow held his temper w/ Maneka, who seduced him and w/ who he begat Shakuntala (therefore, she was born long before Rama was, although whether she married Dushyant in Treta yuga or Dwapar yuga is another question). Finally, he had to demonstrate that he had conquered all anger when he became a Brahmarshi. Notwithstanding, his temper tantrum at Dasharath for balking at parting w/ Rama was uncalled for.

However, aside from that, in his post Brahmarshi life, he rarely lost his temper - one rare occasion was the incident w/ Samba's cross-dressing. Ananya brought up a good point about Shakuntala, and what's more - if he was going to in one night flip over and praise Rama to the skies for exiling Sita, why lose your marbles over her exile in the first place?🤔

I have another question. Vishwamitra's temper is one thing. Does it seem likely that Rama, who generally was dedicated to dharma, would decide to end the life of another person for merely a slight - that too unintended - just because a Brahmin throws a temper tantrum? Was it so important to placate rishis that even lives of innocent people who Rishis were riled at was fair game?

This is another of those stories I just can't believe. Pretty much in the same league as the ones that have Rama asking Lakshman to abandon Sita in the middle of the forest, cut off her hand/ear, et al. Completely agree with u here. 😃

Can anyone tell me which page is the story of Ram-Ravan yudh posted by Vibs...?

Pg 44, where I repost it. The original was in the previous frozen discussion group

P.S. I'm assuming you meant the Rama-Hanuman battle

A few observations about today's episode. When Rama left Ayodhya on his goose chase, he left the kingdom in the hands of Lakshman. In that case, one wonders - wasn't that the Yuvraj's job, and wasn't the Yuvraj Bharat? (Actually, out here, I wouldn't completely fault the Sagars, since in the original Shambhuka story, Rama leaves Ayodhya in Lakshman's charge, rather than Bharat's. But then again, that may be one of the indications of that story not being in the original).

Also, Rama leaves with Hanuman, and a handful of soldiers, on foot. So a chakravarty maharaj can't afford a chariot? Or did the war with Ravan convince him that he's best an infantry warrior (aside from when he used Matali's chariot)? And since he knows that the king is incognito, how exactly does he know where to look?😕

Also, in this story, why does Hanuman have to accompany Rama, when later, Anjani will need him? (Incidentally, they changed the Anjani actress too - I loved the old one - second only to my Dhanya). How was killing this ruler as high a priority for Rama as finding Sita?

Originally posted by: Chandraketu

A few observations about today's episode. When Rama left Ayodhya on his goose chase, he left the kingdom in the hands of Lakshman. In that case, one wonders - wasn't that the Yuvraj's job, and wasn't the Yuvraj Bharat? (Actually, out here, I wouldn't completely fault the Sagars, since in the original Shambhuka story, Rama leaves Ayodhya in Lakshman's charge, rather than Bharat's. But then again, that may be one of the indications of that story not being in the original).

Also, Rama leaves with Hanuman, and a handful of soldiers, on foot. So a chakravarty maharaj can't afford a chariot? Or did the war with Ravan convince him that he's best an infantry warrior (aside from when he used Matali's chariot)? And since he knows that the king is incognito, how exactly does he know where to look?😕

Also, in this story, why does Hanuman have to accompany Rama, when later, Anjani will need him? (Incidentally, they changed the Anjani actress too - I loved the old one - second only to my Dhanya). How was killing this ruler as high a priority for Rama as finding Sita?

Originally posted by: Chandraketu

Pg 44, where I repost it. The original was in the previous frozen discussion group

P.S. I'm assuming you meant the Rama-Hanuman battle

I have one question re: Bharat in Uttarkand, in the context of his not being shown currently. In Valmiki, he is the yuvraj, and advises Rama on quite a number of things, like not engaging in a Rajasuya yagna (is that accurate?), which territory to conquer for Lakshman's sons, to crown Kush & Luv instead of himself, et al. In other words, he was quite influential, and was Rama's policy advisor there.

In the other Ramayans, what exactly is the role of Bharat in the Uttarkand phase? Does he become the yuvraj of Ayodhya, or is he sent off w/ his family to either Kekaya or Gandhara? In the Vedic Age history book by Dr RC Majumdar, I read that he was the ruler of Kekaya (no mention there of Yudhajit or Budhajit) and his sons were the ones who conquered Gandhara. That assertion runs contrary to Valmiki, but it's there. (Which is surprising, since Dr RCM claims that the Ramayan is the only source that he used for the period he convered there). So what I wanted to know is what do the other Ramayan versions say, if anything at all, about Bharat's role after Rama returns and Bharat no longer has to manage the kingdom?

One thing I hate about this Rama-Hanuman battle story - Kashi-naresh (or even Raja Shakuntan in the original source, whatever it was) was a kshatriya, and it was always kshatriya dharma to protect others, not seek the protection of others, particularly Brahmans and women. Note that in this case, my sympathies are w/ Kashi-naresh - endangering him to save Rama from the consequences of exiling Sita was unconscionable, regardless of whether one agrees w/ Rama's decision or not. Here however, you have a kshatriya ruler behaving like a complete wuss, first approaching various rishis, and then approaching a woman, trying to get her to separate her son from his sworn loyalties. I appreciate that everyone values his own life, but given what the kshatriya code of conduct was, the way this ruler behaved was unbelievably cowardly. Granted, there could have been kshatriya cowards, but still, the degree of cowardice in this story was unbelievable.

I mentioned this in the daily update thread, but am posting a question related to the more generic part of the story here.

Originally posted by: Khalrika