Posted:
I can see that some members here have a very one sided view on the epics (Ramayan here). There are versions of Ramayan where Shanta is mentioned and it is also mentioned that she was given as offering to Rishyashringa. One version says it was for Dashrath's Putra kamaeshti yagya, another version says that it was to end the drought in Janak's kingdom and that because of this Janak was severely indebted to Dashrath.
There are various version of Ramayan written in different context and environment. IT is matter of scholarly research, archeologically we have so far not found a single evidence to suggest that characters in Epics (ramayan and mahabharat) are real and that the story is based on real events. We have found archeological evidences of places mentioned in these Epics but that only proves that the many writers of these epics had very good knowledge of geography of indian subcontinent.
Few glaring differences if compare Valmiki Ramayan to other versions (considering Valmiki Ramyan as original because thats the oldest version of Ramyana available)
1. Lakshman Rekha is not part of Valmiki Ramayan, still in popular belief it is there as an important reason of Sita haran.
2. Valmiki Ramanaya considers Ram as HUMAN with God like qualities, by the time we reach 16th century he is converted into God by Tulsidas and his contempraries.
3. In Valmiki Ramayan, Sita is depicted as independent lady. In Tulsidas Ramayan , she becomes a meek lady who takes care of everyone is the household, doesn't question and lives as idea wife who follows her husband.4. I have already mentioned in another post how Uttara Kand is considered as later addition.
When we talk about other version -
1. some version says Sita was Ravana's daughter.
2. some say a dhobi was responsible far maligning Sita's name, some say Shurpanakha comes back to Ayodhya for revenge and she starts gossiping.
3. Some say Kaikeyi had a change of heart and she asks for Ram's exile, some say she was of a good heart but her father had ability to understand bird language and he had heard that Ram will die if he stays around and so she asks for his exile to save him.
4. some say Ram had mishandled Shurpankha, some say it was lakshaman.
5. some say Ravana's brother came to fight after his death and Sita took druga's form and killed him.
6. Some Sita completed Agni parikhsa and came out unscathed, some say she was originally given to Agni for safe keeping and Ravan kidnapped only her "chhaya (shadow)" and Agnipariksha was a method of bringing back original Sita.
There are tribes in India who worship Ravana as deity and Some as their "Adi guru".
Who are we to judge which version is more authentic than others?
I applaud the makers and writers that they are trying to bring in various versions of Ramayan and putting it together in away that socially relevant issues are also getting highlighted. And some philosically very prominent questions are being asked as well. I think the attempt should be encouraged because not everyone has time and inclination to go through all the versions of Ramayan and study them.
This is also gives a great opportunity to understand the fluidity of Epics. A chance to appreciate that how over period of time, in different environment and context these various versions were written and how there could different ways to interpret them.
PS - Adding my response to another post here
"There are about 300 versions of Ramayana world over. Even the supposedly original Ramayan written by Kavi Valmiki has some doubts around it about the Uttara Kand. Many scholars believe that the writing style and language of Uttara Kand is different from rest and "falshruti", which is given at the end of poem is written before Uttara Kand which means Uttara kand may have been written by someone else and not Valmiki. Now uattarakand contains the important episode of Sita Parityaga, her disappearing into earth and Ram's jal samadhi. The widely believed episode of "Lakshaman Rekha" does not exist in Valmiki Ramayan. So please understand that what they are portraying is an amalgamation of many versions of Ramayan.
It is unwise to consider one version of Ramayan true and others as false. May be we should enjoy the show, take our own meaning/philosophy from it and leave the portions out which does not agree with our popular belief.
PS: - Popular doesn't always mean authentic. "
Anupamaa
