Doubts and Discussions from the Ramayan II - Page 77

One question.. who was parents of Sulochana, somewhere i read she was daughter of shesh naag or Adi shesh. Still nither Valmiki nor Tulsi has any information. If this is true then indrajeet is son-in-law of lakshman. What is the source of this information?

Rajnish, Sulochana was the daughter of the nagas. The naga dad/mom's name is not clear. According to Valmiki, Lakshman was 1/8 incarnation of Lord Vishnu (Shatrughan being the other 1/8th, Bharat is1/4th, and Ramji is 1/2 of Lord Vishnu. Together they make 1). Going by Valmiki, Indrajit is not the son-in-law of Lakshman because Lakshman is a direct 1/8th incarnation of Vishnu's power and not Sheshnag at all.

I don't know much about Ramcharitmanas.

I hope this helps!

I recall Vibs once posting that Sulochana was the daughter of not Sesha-nag, but Vasuki, the king of the Nagas. Vasuki, if you recall, was there in both Matsya & Kurma avatars: in Matsya avatar, he was used as the rope which was tied on Matsya's horn (no, it wasn't a swordfish 😆) and the other end was tied to the boat that had the saptarishis - and Vishnu (Matsya's) goal here was to save the Vedas for future generations.

In Kurma avatar, Vasuki was the rope used to wrap around Mt Meru and churn the oceans. I'm assuming that he has 1000 heads, while Adi-sesha has only 7. Reason being that when the mountain was being churned, Vasuki's venom kept coming out, killing a lot of asuras and devas, and so Shiva came to drink all that venom, earning him the name Nilkantha.

Vibs

Can you tell us from which source you had it that Vasuki was the father of Sulochana?

Thanks vrisha and khal di . I don't remember the source but i remember reading somewhere that sulochana was daughter of one of those nagas either shesh naag or vashuki. This i had read in some article in web rather than any scripture. since then i had this doubt. I don't know what source they had used.
Anyways shesh naag, vasuki , takshak e.t.c are all brothers, son of rishi kasyap and kadru. They had 1000 sons. So if we assume lakshman being incarnation of shesh naag and sulochana being daughter of vasuki then can we say they held uncle, nice relation?
Khal di as you said lakshman being 1/8 incarnation of lord vishnu as per valmiki. In bhagwatam balram is mentioned as incarnation of vishnu. And he lives in vaikunth as shesh naag so from this can we assume lakshman being incarnation of vishnu living in the form of shesh naag in vaikunth?
In serial jai Hanuman they shown sulochana being daughter of nagas and ones she was trapped by few hunters. Meghnaath then saved her from them and both taking permission from their parents got married. Which version has this story?

Rajnish

Bhagvatam, and any other compositions by Ved Vyasa had Balaram being Adi-Sesha, and I suspect (you'd know better) that Adhyatma Ramayan is the one where the concept of Lakshman being Adi-Sesha, Shatrughan being Sudarshan-chakra originate. If one goes by Valmiki, that parallelism isn't there of Lakshman being Adi-Sesha. I tend to go w/ Valmiki for Ramayan and Ved Vyasa for Dwapar Yuga, so while I do believe that Balarama was Adi-Sesha, Lakshman wasn't.

In Valmiki, when Lakshman went to the Sarayu and controlled his Indrayaam, Deva Indra came and took him to Vaikuntha. In the Mahabharat (I dunno about the Krishna Puranas), when Krishna asked Balarama to wait for him, Balarama sat on the coast in a meditative posture and when Krishna returned, he witnessed a huge serpent emerge from his mouth.

That said, I however once read somewhere (don't remember where) that Balarama & Krishna were created of 2 hairs plucked out of Vishnu - Balarama being the hair that was while, and Krishna being the hair that was black.

Originally posted by: Vrisha

Rajnish

Bhagvatam, and any other compositions by Ved Vyasa had Balaram being Adi-Sesha, and I suspect (you'd know better) that Adhyatma Ramayan is the one where the concept of Lakshman being Adi-Sesha, Shatrughan being Sudarshan-chakra originate. If one goes by Valmiki, that parallelism isn't there of Lakshman being Adi-Sesha. I tend to go w/ Valmiki for Ramayan and Ved Vyasa for Dwapar Yuga, so while I do believe that Balarama was Adi-Sesha, Lakshman wasn't.

I have only read translated and reduced version of Adhyatama Ramayana and I have never read in AR mentioning lakshman being incarnation of shesha. I may be wrong but this what i remember. Tulsi ramayana very much near to adhyatma ramada does mentions it.

Originally posted by: Vrisha

In Valmiki, when Lakshman went to the Sarayu and controlled his Indrayaam, Deva Indra came and took him to Vaikuntha. In the Mahabharat (I dunno about the Krishna Puranas), when Krishna asked Balarama to wait for him, Balarama sat on the coast in a meditative posture and when Krishna returned, he witnessed a huge serpent emerge from his mouth.

I was following BR chopra version of Mahabharata, I am reading KM Gaunguly transcreation but still in first few Parwas so I am unaware of this but in bhagwatam its been mentioned that after annihilation of yadu dynasty Balram sat down on the shore of the ocean and fixed Himself in meditation and gave up this mortal world(bhagwatam:11.30.26). There is no mentioning of huge serpent being emerged. But thanks for this info from mahabharatra

Originally posted by: Vrisha

That said, I however once read somewhere (don't remember where) that Balarama & Krishna were created of 2 hairs plucked out of Vishnu - Balarama being the hair that was while, and Krishna being the hair that was black.

Yes Its been there in Vishnu Puran(1.5.3).

Exit question: In one more article I have read sita being daughter of Ravana and mandodary . Ravana was being cursed to be killed because of his daughter so he deliberately buried his daughter to save himself under ground who was later found by Janak.
Is it mentioned anywhere and if yes What is the source of this information?

Originally posted by: _rajnish_

I was following BR chopra version of Mahabharata, I am reading KM Gaunguly transcreation but still in first few Parwas so I am unaware of this but in bhagwatam its been mentioned that after annihilation of yadu dynasty Balram sat down on the shore of the ocean and fixed Himself in meditation and gave up this mortal world(bhagwatam:11.30.26). There is no mentioning of huge serpent being emerged. But thanks for this info from mahabharatra

Thanks for this info. BRC's version of the Ramayan ended @ a curious point - the death of Bheeshma, after a caricature representation of Shanti Parva. There was no depiction of the destruction of the Yadavas, which is there in the Mahabharat; by contrast, the birth & childhood of Krishna, his wars w/ Jarasandha & Rukmi are included there.

Funnily enough, the parts of Krishna's story that were recounted in the original Mahabharat - like his war w/ Shalva, the destruction of the Yadavas, were not there in BRC, whereas the parts that were not there in the original, like his childhood, his shiksha w/ Sudama, his war w/ Jarasandha and transfer to Dwaraka, his abduction of Rukmini, are all there. Go figure!!! 😕😆😕😆

Originally posted by: _rajnish_

Yes Its been there in Vishnu Puran(1.5.3).

Exit question: In one more article I have read sita being daughter of Ravana and mandodary . Ravana was being cursed to be killed because of his daughter so he deliberately buried his daughter to save himself under ground who was later found by Janak.
Is it mentioned anywhere and if yes What is the source of this information?

Probably from one of the other flaky editions of the Ramayan, like maybe Ananda Ramayan, or Adhbhooth Ramayan, or any one of those litany of Ramayans out there. 😆😆😆

Sorry, for the late reply. I haven't visited RF for quite a long time. Been very busy.


As for Sulochana, I read the story somewhere - it was a part of some magazine that posts the religious stories.

I don't remember much but here's what I do remember -

Ravan wanted to conquer all the world and in one of his expeditions he had targeted the Naga Loka as well. But Ravan was defeated very badly and returned thus to his country, Lanka. Inrajeet, infuriated at this, plunged into battle against the Nagas (I think Ravan went along as well or Indrajeet dragged him along but Ravan was a part of this battle) The king of the serpents, Vasuki was soundly defeated. Vasuki acknowledged Ravan and Indrajeet's mastery and offered his daughter Sulochana to Indrajeet.

As for Adisesha, some consider him as an avatar of Lord Vishnu himself or as an avatar of the supreme god. Adishesha is supposed to have 1000 heads - I remember reading it - Maybe in one of the translations of Valmiki Ramayan or in Kambaramayanam or both - but not sure where.

Sometimes, Sulochana is called Prameela as well but I do not know the origin of this name.


There are so many versions which say that Sita is Ravan's daughter through Mandodari and each version has its own variations. I went insane trying to find the source of it all or even to find a logical reasoning behind all this but no matter what I try it all ended up going against the description of Sita's birth in Valmiki Ramayan.

i was just going through the discussion here about sita's birth. i once saw a telugu movie in which they show how sita was ravana's daughter but not though mandodari, and how sage narada made a prophecy about how sita was going to be the root cause of ravana's destruction and how ravana in his fury buried her....will try to find out the name of the movie...

Originally posted by: winnerasha

i was just going through the discussion here about sita's birth. i once saw a telugu movie in which they show how sita was ravana's daughter but not though mandodari, and how sage narada made a prophecy about how sita was going to be the root cause of ravana's destruction and how ravana in his fury buried her....will try to find out the name of the movie...

-Asha

I remember seeing a movie like that too. I don't remember if it was Tamil or Telugu. There is a movie by name Ravan / Ravana / Ravanan - not sure which. I think the storyline is somewhat the same.

I also remember seeing a movie in which Ravan kidnaps Sita knowing that she is his daughter (saying that she was suffering in the forests and he kidnaps her to make her live comfortably). The explanations just don't make sense.