Versions of Uttarkand - Page 3

Originally posted by: Chandraketu

Aradhana

Congratulations on Goldie! Vibs, stop slouching and go postal😆

Aradhana

You are right - that was the curse. The other versions being discussed here are just that - other versions. Since Valmiki was the contemporary and wrote the Ramayan at the time of Rama (in fact before), he's is what ought to be treated as authentic.

The other versions have a probabilitity of being or not being true, depending if not on compatibility with Valmiki, at least on logic. The Ananda Ramayan described above paints such an ugly picture of Rama that I refuse to treat it seriously.

Bhavabhuti does have them re-uniting, but then again, it doesn't have Bhrigu's curse. That's actually a version I don't mind so much.

Originally posted by: ananyacool

Well I can't believe such Wacko versions🤢 are being considered by Sagars. Aradhana u're right looking to Bhrigu's curse, the reuniting part of Ram n Sita is quite contradictory to it.

Including all versions of Ramayana into the serial does not necessarily make it a great one...

Ram asking Lakshman to cut Sita's hands ,ears seems so gross...as though its not Ramayana but the fairy tale of snow white.

My biggest question - where in Vaikuntha do they find these stories? I have a tough time finding such stuff (aside from Bhavabhuti, which is in Google Books): what made the Sagars find such wierd-ass versions that they then blend into Valmiki?

While on the bizzare, I recall reading somewhere that Rama and his brothers were all killed by Kush-Luv, who then proceeded to become kings. Needless to say, this was in a Marxist/FemiNazi version of not the Ramayan, but history in that period.

As for the Sagars considering them, according to Gurmeet, based on Chandnii's conversation, they are doing a composite from not just Valmiki, but several authors. Since Tulsidas and Kamban don't have it, the only thing we can conclude is that all these sources are being considered.

Originally posted by: Khalrika

More on Bhavabooti Uttara Ramacharita:

It is in this version that Janaka comes to Ayodhaya to see Sita and then reproaches Rama after he finds that his daughter has been abandoned.

Also, the Amazon version of Sita 😆😆😆 as shown by the Sagars is based on Bhavabooti's version of Sita. Looks like times were a-changing in 7th century India and Bhavabooti was responding to that change by showing Sita as a strong woman. According to Bhavabooti, Rama does not change as a person because he spends his time pinning for her. Sita on the other hand has a complete change of personality. She starts off with resenting her husband for sending her away. Then she spends her time defending her husband (just like the Sita of the Sagars). Finally, she learns to forgive her husband and even look on him with love again. So, Sita goes through this emotional timeline and emerges as a stronger Amazon Sita. 😆😆😆

Khalrika

Does Bhavabhuti have Mrs Amazon forcing the issue and going into exile herself, barefoot and in saffron? Which of your pioneering discoveries has that?

Incidentally, great job uncovering these wacko versions by psychadelic authors - at least I can stop being shocked at whatever they show going forward. Also, next time, can you check if any of them are alive and to be found in Telegraph Avenue?😉🤢

Originally posted by: Chandraketu

Somehow, I don't think that Ramayans that paint such an ugly picture of our Rama belong there with the more reputed versions of the epic. Even Sharath Rocha couldn't write such a vile account of Rama if he wanted to - Rama asking Lakshman to cut off Sita's hand?😲😲😲

And while I don't like Kaikeyi any more than the next person, does it sound even sane that somebody who was ostracized by her own son for at least 14 years would try to re-do the plot, and this time targetting Sita? Too bad they didn't have drug testing when people wrote such excrement.😡😡😡

I used to think the Sagars loved Rama. I'm stunned that they dug up this debris and are displaying it as 'the' version they're going with.

Originally posted by: Chandraketu

Khalrika

Does Bhavabhuti have Mrs Amazon forcing the issue and going into exile herself, barefoot and in saffron? Which of your pioneering discoveries has that?

Incidentally, great job uncovering these wacko versions by psychadelic authors - at least I can stop being shocked at whatever they show going forward. Also, next time, can you check if any of them are alive and to be found in Telegraph Avenue?😉🤢

Khalrika

Thanks again for excavating all this. We look forward to more whenever you have time.

Re: your theory that Uttarkand isn't mentioned by Narad, here is 1-3-38:

Originally posted by: Valmiki

preSaNam vaayu putrasya bharatena samaagamam |
raama abhishheka abhyudayam sarva sainya visarjanam |
sva raashhTra ra.njanam cha eva vaidehyaaH cha visarjanam || 1-3-38

38. preSaNam vaayu putrasya= sending of, Air-god's son, [Hanuma]; bharatena samaagamam = with Bharata, meeting; raama abhishheka abhyudayam= Rama's, coronation, festival; sarva sainya visarjanam= all, military, disbandment; sva raaSTra ra~njanam ca eva= own, kingdom, to the delight of State; vaidehyaaH ca visarjanam= Seetha, too, desolation of.

Sending Hanuma to meet Bharata, for he avowed to self-immolate if Rama were not to come in time; the coronation festival of Rama; disbandment of all military troops of monkeys; Rama's ruling his kingdom to the delight of his subjects, and the desolation of Vaidehi too... are described by Valmiki. [1-3-38]

You are right that it isn't in 1-1. However, one way to check all this might be to see what's written in 1-2 re: whether the total number of verses mentioned there equals the actual sum of the chapters and verses in the Ramayan. In valmikiramayan.net, they have this commentary:

Originally posted by: "valmikiramayan.net"

There is a controversy about the number of verses and cantos. If Uttara Ramayana, otherwise called abhudaya kaanDa , is ascribed to Valmiki, the cantos are seven and chapters are about 649 and verses are about 24,253. But some verses and chapters are deleted for standardization of Ramayana as per this verse and they contain 560 chapters and 24,00 verses only. Some argue that when it is said 24, 000 verses are there, it does not actually a mathematical assertion, like the calculation of mahaa yuga -s and manvantara -s, and as one would give a reply to his age as 30 years, or 60 years, but not as 29 years, 6 months, seven days or so... In furthering that standardization affair, some said that even this canto, Bala kaanda is not authored by Valmiki. It is not clear as of now when the pundits can decide as to which is standard and which is not.

P.S. Ananya, 1-1-97 has the 11000 year reference that I was looking for, but Uttarkand doesn't split it.