Doubts and Discussions from the Ramayan - Page 2

Chandra ji, what took you so long? I was waiting for you to appear in this discussion.

My other doubt - are Sagars taking their accounts from different translations of the Ramayan, or from different movies/TV serials?  😆😆 The one about Indrajit's hand writing the description of his death to Sulochana was there in the 1976 movie Bajrangbali, which one can view @ DailyMotion.com.  The one they'll show tomorrow about Laksman getting all the knowledge from Ravan was there in the ZeeTV show Ravan.

Those are the only sources I can think of for these versions 😆😆 - does anyone else know which translations, if any, do these come from?

Originally posted by: Chandraketu

My other doubt - are Sagars taking their accounts from different translations of the Ramayan, or from different movies/TV serials?  😆😆 The one about Indrajit's hand writing the description of his death to Sulochana was there in the 1976 movie Bajrangbali, which one can view @ DailyMotion.com.  The one they'll show tomorrow about Laksman getting all the knowledge from Ravan was there in the ZeeTV show Ravan.

Those are the only sources I can think of for these versions 😆😆 - does anyone else know which translations, if any, do these come from?

Originally posted by: Chandraketu

Mahiravan story was in Krittivas Ramayan (Bengali).  When I did my ICSE, we had a poem 'Mahiravan vadh' as part of the exam.  Note that the story there was completely different from what's shown in this serial, and is also well captured in the ACK titled Mahiravan.

Ahiravan or Chandrasena or Makardwaj, I had never heard of before this serial.

Mandodari's question - Rama was only forbidden from living in cities or villages, since Kaikeyi (like Duryodhan) didn't want him to develop an alternate power center.  However, there were no restrictions on him travelling in a chariot, and in fact, Dasharath wanted Sumantra to take Rama in it for the 14 years, and Kaikeyi had no objections.  So Rama accepting Indra's loan of a chariot  wasn't a violation.  And yes, it's there in Valmiki itself.

the case with me is different😆. I had read about ahiravan but never of mahiravan. Ahiravan name comes in Ramcharitramanas just b4 ravan decides to wake kumbhkaran, the name also apears in sankat mochan and hanumanji ki aarti. Thanks 4 info from krittivas Ramayan😃. hey i was also ICSE student till my 10th board😛

Originally posted by: Vibhishna

Chandra ji, what took you so long? I was waiting for you to appear in this discussion.

 

In the Krittivas Ramayan, was the story of Maharadwaj also written?

 

And I completely agree with your answer about Kaikeyi's conditions. But Kaikeyi did object to Ram living in luxury. And I think she agreed to let Sumantra take Ram in the chariot as she did not want Ram to remain in Ayodhya for long.

My internet connection has been acting up, which is also why I was unable to do much in the Rakshashkul contest either.  It looks like it'll be that way for some days before it gets straightened out 😭

In Krittivas Ramayan, there was only the story of Mahiravan: his wife isn't shown, and neither is Makardwaj.  He is also described as a son of Ravan, as opposed to a friend, as shown here.  The circumstances under which Rama & Lakshman were captured were somewhat different from what's shown, and Hanuman assumed a miniature form and went, and did not encounter so many demonic obstacles as he did here.  Also, as we discussed, it was he who beheaded Mahiravan, and there was no battle between Rama & Mahiravan - it was purely Hanuman's doing.  Also, the Mahiravan episode happened after the death of Indrajit & Kumbhakarna, and before Ravan; here, it actually precedes the war.

If you get hold of the ACK Mahiravan, that gives a good account of the story.  I'll probably post the story of Mahiravan sometime, once my internet is back in form, and this forum doesn't seem as slow. 

[quote=Mandodari]The Sarathy sent by Devendra does say that the rath has extra divya baans. I guess that is why he was given the chariot. Also, the fight has to be among equals. Both Ram and Ravan are kings and they need to fight on an equal footing. [/quote]

About the rath having extra weapons, I think it's inaccurate for a couple of  reasons.  Rama already had all the divine weapons - from Brahmastra down - from Vishwamitra & Agastya.    Remember, he used a couple of them to sever Kumbhakarna's arms, and Lakshman  used the Indrastra to kill Meghnad (not mentioned in the serial).  So the chariot was just sent to Rama to eliminate any advantage in mobility that Ravan had, and prevent him from elongating the war, which, if done, would have resulted in Rama completing 14 years but still not returning to Ayodhya, with fatal consequences for Bharat.

Also, in Valmiki, Rama is advised by Matali to use the Brahmastra, while  in Tulsidas, he's advised by Vibhishan to aim at his navel and destroy the amrit-kund.  Which version has Vibhishan advising him to send 31 arrows his way, as shown here?

Mandodari, I also think you are right on agni-pravesha

P.S. Vibs, you're just 9 short of joining me as 'Senior Member', while Mandodari, you are 42.  C'mon, spam a bit - it's lonely at the middle 😆😆😆

Originally posted by: Mandodari

Why is it being called agni pariksha when it is actually agni pravesha? Ram never asks her to jump into the fire. He just tells her that she is free to go to someone else for protection. She gets angry at the cruel words and asks Lakshma to start a fire. Of course, he dosen't stop her. So, isn't it agni pravesha and not pariksha? Anyone with more knowledge than me, please dispel my ignorance.

Originally posted by: akhl

 

Ram did not give this pariksha to Sita. It is called Agni Pariksha because Sita herself undertook this pariksha. Before entering the fire, Sita says, "O fire, the universal witness, if my heart has never swayed from virtue, if it has never strayed from Raghunandan, then protect my body on the pyre."

 

As you can see, it was a test by Sita herself to prove her innocence.

Originally posted by: akhl

 

Ram did not give this pariksha to Sita. It is called Agni Pariksha because Sita herself undertook this pariksha. Before entering the fire, Sita says, "O fire, the universal witness, if my heart has never swayed from virtue, if it has never strayed from Raghunandan, then protect my body on the pyre."

 

As you can see, it was a test by Sita herself to prove her innocence.

Thanks Akhl. I understand now.

Originally posted by: Chandraketu

Mahiravan story was in Krittivas Ramayan (Bengali).  When I did my ICSE, we had a poem 'Mahiravan vadh' as part of the exam.  Note that the story there was completely different from what's shown in this serial, and is also well captured in the ACK titled Mahiravan.

Ahiravan or Chandrasena or Makardwaj, I had never heard of before this serial.

Mandodari's question - Rama was only forbidden from living in cities or villages, since Kaikeyi (like Duryodhan) didn't want him to develop an alternate power center.  However, there were no restrictions on him travelling in a chariot, and in fact, Dasharath wanted Sumantra to take Rama in it for the 14 years, and Kaikeyi had no objections.  So Rama accepting Indra's loan of a chariot  wasn't a violation.  And yes, it's there in Valmiki itself.

Thanks Chandra