Ramayan - What is original? - Page 2

Originally posted by: Aashna_30

Lovely post dear watching new type of Ramayan and loving it...its too early to draw any conclusion ..not fair to call it joke or using words like 'shame on CVs..wounderfull post 👏

Thank u so much.

Originally posted by: ..RamKiJanaki..

Yes, Valmiki Ramayan is the original version because it was written by Valmiki, who was a contemporary of Ram. To believe other versions over his is like saying we are going to believe historical accounts of Christopher Columbus written today over ones written in his day and age. Makes absolutely no sense!

Not saying we can't read other versions and widen our knowledge on their stories, but in the end of the day, we can't deny Valmiki is the original one.

Originally posted by: Muggle_Diaries

I Thank you for this...I really do.

You have put across points which I have myself been thinking about since many years.

I consider Ramayana and Mahabharata as a story, a great ones at that. But it is still a story. A story of mankind.

There have been many versions of this story. As you mentioned about Uttarakand and many versions of Ramayana, a similar theory has been going around for Mahabharata too. Some experts think that many stories and parva's were written over the years by various people.

Story telling is a part of every culture, existed even before the advent of written languages. This is great way to pass on the knowledge, philosophical concepts of that era, customs and rituals and or anything for that matter, to the next generation. The stories are easier to remember than dry verses of teachings, stories make things interesting and easier to understand.

Coming to Mythology, the stories were changed or interpreted according to the socio-cultural norms of that era. That is why they are interesting to read and see different points of view, reflecting the thoughts of that age and time.

There is really no 'correct' or the 'right' or the 'original' versions of them.

And Ramayana stories are not limited to India alone. There are versions of it in Burma, Indonesia, Cambodia, Laos, Thailand, Malaysia and so on. All these countries have their own Ramayana which developed over centuries.

Love

Kshithi

PS: I believe we have briefly met in KY2 forum? 😊

Originally posted by: TheFaerieQueen

Hi @Ksithi, yes of course we met in KY2 Forum 😃. How have you been? Glad to meet here, hope to interact more on this forum.

Yes you are right about Mahabharata as well, Mahabharata text as we know of today has been composed over 1000 years, so people from everywhere contributed in its story and it reached its final form in 1000 years! Before that Mahabharata has been part of oral storytelling as well, so I think as of now its pointless to argue over the "Originality" of texts.

Yes versions of Ramayana are available across the part of world wherever we used to trade during Indus Valley civilisation/Maurya and Gupta dynasty or were a part of Indus Valley Civilisation//Maurya and Gupta dynasty.

There is a research institute in Pune called BORI, they have studied various versions of Mahabharata for 50 years (the study lasted for 50 years, imagine the vastness and variety of it!) and they have come up with a critical version of Mahabharata. And they have concluded that many events, that are popular right now, were later interpolation. And the biggest of which is "Draupadi Cheer haran"!

Another example that "popular" may not be "authentic" 😊

Originally posted by: Muggle_Diaries

I am fine. 😊

How are you? How have you been? I do hope to read more such sensible and well researched posts from you in future.

A 1000 years of effort into this Epic story!

Incredible! No wonder the stories are so rich, with so many years and creativity behind them.

Did you come across any theories as to why there are similarities between Greek, Roman and Indian Gods? Was the interaction and exchange of idea happened during or after Alexander's invasion? I also would love to know more about what you are studying. Can you please suggest me some good books related to the emergence of these stories and the details of the research that went into the study? I know I am being vague here.😊

Are they still researching on Mahabharata in Pune? Is there anyway I can read their findings?

Love

Kshithi

Originally posted by: ..RamKiJanaki..

If you try to understand the nature of God, you will realize that God is neither male nor female. He has no form, but he assumes a form through various incarnations in order to help his devotees. Yes, some Gods have more than one "wife" but are they really more than one? All our scriptures say the same thing. All the forms of God are different aspects of Him/Her. All the forms of Devi are one, so it doesn't matter how many forms she takes. Take Lord Krishna for example. People say very wrong things about him because he had 16, 1008 wives, but have they ever tried to understand the secret behind his many marriages? His first eight wives, his principal queens, are the incarnations of Ashta Lakshmi. They may have had different forms, different names, and born to different people, but they are all Mahalakshmi only. As for the 16,100 wives, they were wives in name only but not in action. They were women who were kidnapped by Naraksura and lived a life of hell in his kingdom. Lord Krishna killed him and married them all to give them a secure home, because back in those days an unmarried woman was not safe on her own, particularly a woman who had already lived with another man for many years.

You may ask why did Mahalakshmi take birth to many people, only to marry Lord Krishna over and over again, but that's because many people wanted her as their daughter, and God grants every one of our wishes, so Mahalakshmi was born multiple times in dwapar yuga, and in every one of her forms as Rukmini, Jambavathi, Satyabhama, etc she married the Lord. So no, Lord Krishna was not preaching polygamy in his incarnation. In fact, Bhagavatham describes him as a yogi who had no earthly desires. Everything he did was to make his devotees happy.

Understand the concept of God first before pointing fingers at him. No, God can't be wrong because he is not human. To assign fault with God is to give him the same status as us, and honestly we have no right to do that. Who are we to judge God? Our status is much much, much lower than his.

Originally posted by: Muggle_Diaries

I Thank you for this...I really do.

You have put across points which I have myself been thinking about since many years.

I consider Ramayana and Mahabharata as a story, a great ones at that. But it is still a story. A story of mankind.

There have been many versions of this story. As you mentioned about Uttarakand and many versions of Ramayana, a similar theory has been going around for Mahabharata too. Some experts think that many stories and parva's were written over the years by various people.

Story telling is a part of every culture, existed even before the advent of written languages. This is great way to pass on the knowledge, philosophical concepts of that era, customs and rituals and or anything for that matter, to the next generation. The stories are easier to remember than dry verses of teachings, stories make things interesting and easier to understand.

Coming to Mythology, the stories were changed or interpreted according to the socio-cultural norms of that era. That is why they are interesting to read and see different points of view, reflecting the thoughts of that age and time.

There is really no 'correct' or the 'right' or the 'original' versions of them.

And Ramayana stories are not limited to India alone. There are versions of it in Burma, Indonesia, Cambodia, Laos, Thailand, Malaysia and so on. All these countries have their own Ramayana which developed over centuries.

Love

Kshithi

PS: I believe we have briefly met in KY2 forum? 😊