PDA

View Full Version : Ramayana - Another Great Epic



Pages : 1 [2] 3

viggop
3rd August 2005, 11:02 AM
Dear HariKrishnan Sir
I just read that report from chennaionline and was about to update it here.You have already given the link.Thanks for the trouble you took in digging this out for me.

Can you please continue this thread of Ramayana.Tell us more about things like Dharma,how to destroy ego,etc.

viggop
4th August 2005, 11:31 AM
Thyagaraja,one of the carnatic music trinities,and also a great devotee of Lord Rama.In his songs, he has mentioned few incidents of Ramayana.See it here.

http://carnatica.net/special/tsp-ramayana-i.htm

carnatica.net is owned by carnatic artists Sowmya and Shashikiran.

viggop
4th August 2005, 11:33 AM
[tscii:cf0d058948]HariKrishnan Sir

After you read the thygaraja ramayana, can you recollect any stories of these incidents which Thaygaraja mentions.

"The Singili Muni episodes mentioned in kalalanerchina (Dipakam) is yet to be unraveled. So is the incident described in Vachamagocharame (Kaikavasi) in which Rama shoots a second arrow to smash a first one originally aimed for cutting the tail of chamari deer. "
[/tscii:cf0d058948]

a.ratchasi
4th August 2005, 01:44 PM
Another version of 'Seetha' in the hands of Ravana (http://www.tirumala.org/opage32.html)

viggop
4th August 2005, 01:55 PM
a.r.
This seems to be a completely new version of Ramayana.Vedavathi taking place of Seetha!

Hari Krishnan
4th August 2005, 03:46 PM
That is nothing new. It is a story narrated in the Uttara Kanda. Vibishna in Kamban mentions that this Sita is the reincarnation of Vedavati. This may be found in the MandhiralOchanai padalm at the commencementof Yuddha Kandam. (I am a bit busy now and will quote the verse some time later.)

In the meantime you may read the story of Vedavati here:

Ravana charmed:
http://www.chennaionline.com/festivalsnreligion/religion/religion554.asp

The curse of Vedavati:
http://chennaionline.com/festivalsnreligion/religion/religion555.asp

I would soon exhaust all the links in ChennaiOnline. :))

viggop
4th August 2005, 04:19 PM
Dear Harikrishnan Sir
I did read the Vedavathi story by you in chennaionline.But,what is new to me is that Agni sends Vedavathi to Ravana and keeps Sita safely till Rama vanquishes Ravana.This one I dont think has been mentioned by you.You had mentioned that Vedavathi incarnated as Sita.

Hope you have read Thyagaraja ramayana in carnatica.net

Hari Krishnan
4th August 2005, 05:27 PM
The story of 'Real Sita' disappearing in Panchavati and Ravana carrying off a 'Maya Sita' has several versions. Right Hon'ble Srinivasa Sastriyar cites two of them and questions the validity of these 'theories' which are not supported by Valmiki. These are not supported by Kamban, either. I have dealt with two of these versions and another theory that Ravana was a devotee of Mahalakshmi and hence he carried her to Lanka, in my current series on Sita. You may read them here:

Was he a devotee?
http://chennaionline.com/festivalsnreligion/religion/religion745.asp and

Clever but not convincing
http://chennaionline.com/festivalsnreligion/religion/religion746.asp

I am now getting a bit worried if I am using the Forum as a dumping ground for the URLs to my articles. :?

As for the Thyagaraja Ramayana, it is an interesting study. Wonder if someone has gone into the intricacies of Arunachala Kavirayar's Rama Nataka Kirthanai.

Hari Krishnan
4th August 2005, 05:44 PM
[tscii:8f14679ab6]žž ¡ Ȣ¢츢ȡ Ǣ Ȣθȡ. ž ɡ Ꭰáġ , Ꭰ֨¡ ţ Ǣ žž Ȣž Ģ¢. :

'¢ Ǣ ɡ
š¢ Ƣ ħ?
" ¡" ǡ ;
, Ӿ Ȣɡ.

¢ Ǣ ɡ žž Ȣ . ŧ ¡ Ȣ츢ȡ ţ ȡ.

Ꭰž ɡ, ۨ ո šŢ ţ ȡ:

â¢ Ţ žž ; " ,
ǡ! Ȣ; ǡ ,
, â ,
Ȣɧ! áɡ Ģ Ȣ, ¢ɡ!

ɡ ¢ Ǣ ¢ žž ɧ! ŧ 즸ġ ɧ! ɨ Ţ Ţħ! Ũ , ƢŨ Ȣ Ȣ áۼ š ɡ! áۨ Ģ ȢЦ. ! š 츢ȡ![/tscii:8f14679ab6]

Hari Krishnan
4th August 2005, 07:08 PM
One small query unrelated to the thread. I don't know why I am shown as a 'newbie hubber', when I have been participating in the Forum Hub from 1999. And, at the end of the page I am told that I cannot post new topics. Is this a policy adopted in the case of 'newbie hubbers' or everyone? :shock:

viggop
4th August 2005, 07:22 PM
Dear HariKrishnan Sir
This 'newbie hubber' is given based on the number of posts in the new forum.If you cross 500 posts, you are 'senior hubber'.This is the new forum and it is heavily moderated and different from old forum.
New topics can be posted only with permission of Moderator hubbers - NOV,sbadri99,Thiru .This is to prevent new topics being opened which abuses caste and religion.

Regarding Arunachala Kavirayar's Rama Nataka Kirthanai, why cant you be the person to through its intricacies and educate other hubbers like us? ;-)

rajraj
4th August 2005, 08:34 PM
One small query unrelated to the thread. I don't know why I am shown as a 'newbie hubber', when I have been participating in the Forum Hub from 1999. And, at the end of the page I am told that I cannot post new topics. Is this a policy adopted in the case of 'newbie hubbers' or everyone? :shock:

Hari Krishnan: Indian History and Culture section was abused a lot and was closed down for a while to edit out obnoxious posts and also delete threads dealing with caste and other controversial topics where emotions were running high. Also, posting new threads is controlled for the same reasons. You can always propose a new topic to the moderators of this section or the administrator RR.

Sudhaama
4th August 2005, 11:25 PM
Dear Mr. "Hari Krishnan"

// One small query unrelated to the thread. I don't know why I am shown as a 'newbie hubber', when I have been participating in the Forum Hub from 1999.//

Very Very Very Very Very.... GLAD to see you back here... to your Old-Home....

So far this Thread-Boat was sailing haphazardly towards different directions ... even aimlessly sometimes ...

And now since You the EXPERT ON THE SUBJECT ... have joined, I am sure ...

... this Dais will become RICHER and MORE INTERESTING as well as BETTER PURPOSEFUL too

In my Opinion ... ... you well deserve to be identified as .... PRO- HUBBER .... irrespective of your age in this Forum

.. You. being a Well-knowledged Expert-Writer in the Multi-faceted areas and dimensions.

In fact ...You are NOT A NEWBIE..... but an OLDBIE... rather a SENIORBIE...

... To be precise......You are a "PROBIE"

viggop
5th August 2005, 11:57 AM
How do we take this Ramayana thread-boat from now on?
We have to set some goals/aim on what we plan to discuss in Ramayana thread so that it benefits lot of people.

viggop
5th August 2005, 12:01 PM
Dear HariKrishnan Sir
I read your chennaionline post where Mandodari cries over the dead body of Ravana.
She asks some very good questions as you have described.

"Have the 5 senses which you had controlled initially in your life when you did tapas hit back at you? You defeated the senses and gained boons from Shiva,Brahma but they have hit back at you by killing you.You were killed by your (lack of control of) senses and not Rama!"

Beautiful words.We have to keep the 5 senses under control always.Otherwise,they'll kill us.

viggop
8th August 2005, 11:11 AM
How was Ravana finally killed by Rama.Reading HariKrishnan's sir in chennaionline,it is mentioned that Rama used brahmaastra to kill ravana.

I have heard a story where Ravana's power is present in his navel and Vibishana told Rama about it.Hence,Rama kills him by aiming at his navel.is this story true?

Hari Krishnan
10th August 2005, 05:47 PM
I have heard a story where Ravana's power is present in his navel and Vibishana told Rama about it.Hence,Rama kills him by aiming at his navel.is this story true?

No. There are countless folklore, stories of pravachan-kartas, and so many others that have their relevance in their own place. You see, there is a saying in Tamil, [tscii:9992cff115]¡ 측Ţ ɡĢá [/tscii:9992cff115] There doubtlessly are so many enjoyable parables, involving the Ramayana characters. So far so good. But the negative part of it is, people tend to believe that it is there in Valmiki Ramayana, or Kamba Ramayana or any other Ramayana that is widely respected.

That Ravana could only be killed by Brahma-astra was informed to Rama by Mathali, the charioteer of Indra, who comes with the chariot of Indra for the last day's battle. It is Mathali who urges Rama to use Brahma-astra, which Rama was hesitating to use from the beginning. (Not so with Lakshmana. We see him using the divine missile twice in the epic. The first during the battle with Atikaya, the second son of Ravana and the second during the battle with Indrajit.

The story of Ravana's power being present in his navel is not there either in Valmiki or Kamba Ramayana. To my knowledge in other Ramayanas too.

BTW, folks, I was going through the previous pages. I see a lot of heat generated about Agni Pravesa. This is the point that is being discussed by me a bit elaborately in my ChennaiOnline Religion column, for the past three months. I have just completed the narrative portion and started examining the validity of several arguments against Sita.

In case any of you are interested, you may read the column. And raise your questions, doubts et al, so that I can handle them too.

viggop
10th August 2005, 07:18 PM
Harikrishnan Sir
I do not understand why Rama hesitated to use brahmaastra? You have mentioned in chennaionline that ravana used even the trident of Shiva against Rama(which Rama stopped by saying an angry "hoon"). When Ravana(who is demon race and not human race) can use divine weapon, why should not Rama respond in the similar way.Rama is only responding,right?

Also, did Ravana ever use the brahmaastra? Did he know how to use it? I know Indrajit did use it.In the final battle with Ravana, did Rama exhaust all the weapons of ravana and finally left him without weapons and then used the brahmaastra against Ravana? please answer when you have time.

Hari Krishnan
10th August 2005, 11:11 PM
Harikrishnan Sir
I do not understand why Rama hesitated to use brahmaastra? You have mentioned in chennaionline that ravana used even the trident of Shiva against Rama (which Rama stopped by saying an angry "hoon"). When Ravana(who is demon race and not human race) can use divine weapon, why should not Rama respond in the similar way.Rama is only responding,right?

Also, did Ravana ever use the brahmaastra? Did he know how to use it? I know Indrajit did use it.In the final battle with Ravana, did Rama exhaust all the weapons of ravana and finally left him without weapons and then used the brahmaastra against Ravana? please answer when you have time.

Before answering your questions, I have to make one thing clear. An arrow is different from an astra. These two are not similar. An arrow is normally made of a ligther material. Mostly the arrows used by soldiers and those belonging to the 'files' were made of lighter wood for body and metal tipped. Lighter metals were used for making arrows for kings and the others come under the 'ranks', that is Commanders-in-chief Second-in-Command, wing leaders etc. It has to be remembered that arrows had to be shot from bows and had to be light in order not to lose their fillip in flight. Hundreds of varieties of arrows are described in the epics. From the ardha-chandra tipped arrow to 'palladam' a very thin variety of arrows which were used for shooting in a bunch of anything from five to hundred are described. Instead of laughing them off, one has to sit and study the details. I am collecting the details. It may even be that a separate book may be published on this subject. Who knows. God willing. :)

Use of metal arrows was a privilege of Kings and other high rankers. (Of course their arsenel included the wooden bodied arrows too.) This was essential due to the fact that making arrows with lighter metals involved technology and was a comparatively expensive affair. That is why the name of kings and others were inscribed on every arrow. The scouts moving about in the battlefiled would collect arrows and other weapons from the bodies of the dead and would pass the usable weapons back to soldiers and others. The specail arrows would be identified by names inscribed on each weapon and would go back to the appropriate person. (However, Rama's arrows are known to come back to the quiver by themselves. There is nothing to discuss more on this point of how it could have come back. We need a better understanding on the subject.)

On the other hand the divine weapons are not just arrows. The way to launch them differs very greatly from shooting an arrow. One has to intiate them with mantras. Now, I have my own views about the 'mantras' etc. The person who launches it recites the ways in which the missile is to be launched, encoded in the mantras. Remembers the steps in which the missile is to be fired, by reciting the mantras and goes about firing it. It is to be noted that every time a missile is fired, invariably the poet mentions 'thazal saarthi', that is, 'lighting it with fire - or firing it.' And our commentators write a hotch potch 'urai' saying ɡ.[/tscii:46e17d312b] The arrows are not fired. They are shot with the bow. The poets speak of various weapons that issue forth from this one divine weapon, be it Varunastra, Vayuvastra, Narayanastra, Brahmastra or Brahma Siras, the supreme of all weapons. This is something similar to projectiles and other destructive instruments that spill and are thrown about all around when a bombshell bursts.

The question of divine weapons - or missiles - is to be still gone into and studied. The Mahabaratha gives more detailed account of weapons than the Ramayana. I am collecting information on this. But, what one comes to understand is astras were weapons of mass destruction. Rama was against the use of such weapons of mass destruction. He had always maintained that the use of Brahmastra and other divine weapons should be deferred in all cases. In fact, it was because Rama told Lakshmana that he must use only ordinary weapons in the battle with Indrajit, Lakshmana was precluded from the use of Brahmastra. See these verses from Kamban.

[tscii:46e17d312b] Ţ ;
, 쨸 Ȣ ,
, ' ̧, ;
; ' .

츢 Ã . ɡ ۨ Ţ. ¡ ǢЦ. Ũ ŢŢ Ũ Ƣ. . ɡ.

, 'ȿ ơ !
츢, ĸ
; ɡ ʸ' ȡ,
; Ţ, ר .

, á, ' ȡŧ! ȡ Ã Ƣ ġ. Ĩ ;. , Ө . ,' ý š Ũ Ţ.

á Ծ ⺢ ( ¡) ¢ Ã , , š Ţ. о .

á, Ĩ Ƣ ź ž . Ꭰġ Ǣ .  ž ۨ . š š ý. Ũ¢ Ţ. ɡ ¡ Ꭰ, á â Ȣ Ÿ š. ¡ ա ġ. šš ¡ ġ. Ч Ţ 츢ȡɡ ġ.

á Ũ Ȣ - a policy decision - Ȣ ¡ (á ý)즸 Ψø :[/tscii:46e17d312b]

To use or not to use: http://chennaionline.com/festivalsnreligion/religion/religion509.asp

He is at it again
http://www.chennaionline.com/festivalsnreligion/religion/religion510.asp

Killing from hiding:
http://www.chennaionline.com/festivalsnreligion/religion/religion511.asp

viggop
11th August 2005, 10:19 AM
Thanks Harikrishnan Sir
I was all along thinking that arrow is the english equivalent of asthra and both are launched from the bow!!! This is the impression I got from seeing the Ramanan Sagar's ramayana in TV. The way you have described asthra seems it is like a missile(liquid propelled/solid propelled).Indian army conducts separate training for commanders who have to lauch missiles!!!
So, Rama does not use divine weapons just because he does not want to kill other people.When he used brahmaastra on Ravana,i think he must have curbed its power so that only Ravana is killed and not everyone in the battle field.

In the mahabharatha, when ashwathama launches the brahmaastra against Arjuna,i think he uses the blade of grass and changes it into brahmasastra. Is this true?

Hari Krishnan
11th August 2005, 11:05 AM
Thanks Harikrishnan Sir

I was all along thinking that arrow is the english equivalent of asthra and both are launched from the bow!!! This is the impression I got from seeing the Ramanan Sagar's ramayana in TV. The way you have described asthra seems it is like a missile(liquid propelled/solid propelled).Indian army conducts separate training for commanders who have to lauch missiles!!!

The launching of astra still required the use of the bow. By the word bow, we tend to understand a shape something like an elongated D. There were many different types of bows. The warriors bow was not similar to the hunter's bow. One has to remember that the hunter has to run with his bow in hand, behind his kill. The archer on foot could not carry as heavy a bow as the archer on a chariot. The shapes, the accessories, the attachments, every single detail differs. This is an on-going study. I am yet to come to any conclusions on this, especially in the absence of solid material evidence in museums. Even the weapons that lie in the museums lie unclassified.

Therefore, the launching was still with the use of the bow.

When I used the word 'missile' and when I said 'launching it' and 'firing it' I did not have the ICBMs and their likes in mind. I meant that which can be fired and launched, that which can be propelled from one place to another, that which can explode, and that which can destroy a large area. When the poet says 'mUvulagum aziyum' one has to remember that the word 'ulagu' need not always mean 'world'. It could simply be a 'larger area'.

The difference between an arrow and astra ([tscii:c8364e71c4] [/tscii:c8364e71c4]) is very clearly brought out in the epics. The poets do not use the word astra when they mean an ordinary arrow and vice versa. But how was an astra made, what was it composed of, how was it propelled, etc. are questions which still remain mysterious. Because not a single 'astra' was made by anyone on earth. Every single one of them - the epics mention very clearly - were received from celestials. This is where Eric Van Daniken's theories sound valid and plausible, though they are scoffed and mocked at by a large number of researchers.



So, Rama does not use divine weapons just because he does not want to kill other people.When he used brahmaastra on Ravana,i think he must have curbed its power so that only Ravana is killed and not everyone in the battle field.

Yes. I have explained that in the article to which I have given URL. It is not Rama alone. There are so many instances in the Mahabharata, where the word 'caution' is always spoken of, when an 'astra' is handed over. Conditions are laid down as to when they are to be used. The person who receives it gets training on launching, regulating its course, including/excluding persons from its effect (this is limited only the a few astras) and withdrawing it too.

Once again, while regulating the course was possible in almost all the cases, withdrawing was possible in a few cases - like the extremely potent Brahma-astra and Brahma Siras. A few of the astras could be used just only once. Like the bombs, they burst and destroy. 'It would then return to me,' would say the bestower of the missile. Like the Naga-astra that Karna used.



In the mahabharatha, when ashwathama launches the brahmaastra against Arjuna,i think he uses the blade of grass and changes it into brahmasastra. Is this true?

I think you are speaking about the last scuffle between Aswathama and Arjuna, after the War. Yes. He charges a blade of grass with the power of (not Brahma-astra but) Brahma Siras. He did not know how to withdraw it, while Arjuna could. This was so because Aswathama had not been taught on the art of launching and withdrawing that particular astra, while Arjuna was.

The care that the Masters took, the trust that a student should gain, before the intricacies of the use of an astra could be learnt can be seen by this incident. Acharya Drona had taught the art completely (in respect of Brahma Siras) to Arjuna, while he just started, but not completed the training of his own son.

This is a very vast subject. I am still in the very preliminary stage of collecting data and evoloving ideas. And therefore I am not in a poisition to present a more rounded picture. God willing.[/quote]

viggop
11th August 2005, 02:38 PM
Dear Harikrishnan Sir
Thanks a lot! I hope you succeed in your research on the weapons described in the epics with the grace of God.

viggop
12th August 2005, 11:20 AM
Dear Harikrishnan Sir

Why is Mandodari given such importantance? She is supposed to be a paragon of virtue to be emulated.
But,in Ramayana ,i think she is just a very minor character who does not seem to have done anything to her credit.
She tries to advice Ravana to give back Sita.I dont think Ravana gets angry at her like he got angry with Vibishana.

Also, i read that she was exceptionally beautiful that Hanuman initially mistook her for Sita.But,saliva was flowing from her mouth in sleep and hence he identified her as a member of rakshasha race.is this true?
Also, what does the name "Mandodari" mean?

viggop
12th August 2005, 11:33 AM
MS has rendered a sloka from Valmiki Ramayanam
http://www.musicindiaonline.com/l/1/m/artist.14/

The sloka is "Tato Yagne".Can someone give the meaning of this slokam by Valmiki maharishi?

viggop
17th August 2005, 12:01 PM
A Virutham by Kambar rendered by MS.Enjoy!

http://www.musicindiaonline.com/l/1/m/composer.91/

S.Balaji
17th August 2005, 04:53 PM
[tscii:ec057b6a34]I think you are speaking about the last scuffle between
Aswathama and Arjuna, after the War. Yes. He charges a blade of grass with the power of (not Brahma-astra but) Brahma Siras. He did not know how to withdraw it, while Arjuna could. This was so because Aswathama had not been taught on the art of launching and withdrawing that particular astra, while Arjuna was.

The care that the Masters took, the trust that a student should gain, before the intricacies of the use of an astra could be learnt can be seen by this incident. Acharya Drona had taught the art completely (in respect of Brahma Siras) to Arjuna, while he just started, but not completed the training of his own son

Dear Mr. Hari Krishnan,

Excellent interpretation and presentation . Great to see this.
I have one query.

I heard that Ashwathama also learnt on the art of launching and withdrawing Brahma Siras but intentionally did not withdrew it but REDIRECTED ITS COURSE TOWARDS THE WOMB OF ABIMANYUS WIFE UTTARA so that the entire Pandava race will not have any successor.
However the grace of SriKrishna decimated the asthra and protected the womb and the baby is Parikshit.

Can you pls clarify


[/tscii:ec057b6a34]

Hari Krishnan
17th August 2005, 05:50 PM
Dear Mr. Hari Krishnan,

I heard that Ashwathama also learnt on the art of launching and withdrawing Brahma Siras but intentionally did not withdrew it but REDIRECTED ITS COURSE TOWARDS THE WOMB OF ABIMANYUS WIFE UTTARA so that the entire Pandava race will not have any successor.
However the grace of SriKrishna decimated the asthra and protected the womb and the baby is Parikshit.

Can you pls clarify


[tscii:dcb5a47070]

ɢ Ƣ ¡ġ? :-)

ɢ Ê ¢ ȡ ¡ Ţ и ׸. 'ب¡ ¢ ȡ ý Ţ' . ' ¡ . ɡ , ȡ, š측 'ý Ȣ Ǣ ܼ' ŢŢ. â Ƣ š 측. ¢á â¡ɢ ( ¢ â¡) ' ɡ' ȢŢ Ģ, (ġ ɡ) Ţ , Ƣ š 측 .

̸ Ǣ Ĩ Ȣ â¡ɢ ɡ. š . ɡ â¡ . â â¡ɧ ŢŢ. š¢. ( ž á ո.)

٨ âȢ ɡ. Ţ , ' Ê Ծ ¢ . Ө ɢ 'áԾ ¢ ' , ġ () Ê ¢ Ǣ' Ȣɡ. ' ú ¢ ¢, ɡ áԾ ¢ ġ' , ɡ ǡ ܼ Ţ. ɧ Ţ. ', ¢ š. ,' ȡ .

, ɢ ¢ Ȣġ ڸ. ȡ ġ. Ţ򨾨 ɢ Ţ, áԾ ¢ Ȣġ.

. áԾ š Ծ. á½ ɧ¡ ԾǢ ȡ Ȣθ. ɧ¡ Ǣ . ɢ Ţ ø. Ţ; ɡ ġ Ţ â, 쾢š Ţġ .

è, ú . ' ' ȡ. þ . 'ɡ , ȡ â . ý Ψ¡ Ծ 򾾡. ɡ Ţ. ɢ âɢ ȢŢ,'

ý ġ. ' â¡' , 'â¡ â¡ Ծ ɡ? ç¡ ɢ ռ ¡' (θǢ 𧼡 ) Ţ¡ Ģ, , ¢ Ţâ Ţ ¢ Ƣ Ƣ Ȣ, þ¡ á . Ţ ɡ ã â¡ . ¢. þ ž á .[/tscii:dcb5a47070]

S.Balaji
17th August 2005, 06:16 PM
Dear Mr. Hari Krishnan,

I could not read your previous posting .

There seems to be a technical problem on this thread

S.Balaji
17th August 2005, 06:30 PM
The care that the Masters took, the trust that a student should gain, before the intricacies of the use of an astra could be learnt can be seen by this incident. Acharya Drona had taught the art completely (in respect of Brahma Siras) to Arjuna, while he just started, but not completed the training of his own son

As Mr. Hari Krishnan precisely mentioned, I also recollect one episode in Ramayanam when Brahmarishi Vishwamithra takes Rama and Lakshmana to forest to help him perform all the yagnas.
One day, Vishwamithra will teach all the divine weapons ( Divya Asthirangal ) to Rama . Sri Rama will also chant the mantras and apply them . One by one, the respective Gods will appear before Ram and will assure him. Rama experimented to find out whether everything is perfect.
Yes , only in the final stage when Indira's charioteer Mathali reminds him that have you forgotten to use Brahmastra ? Sri Ram will respectifully chant the mantra and apply on Ravana.
There was another incident when Parasurama comes in the way of a newly wedded Rama while coming back from Mithilapuri.
Parasurama , on hearing that Ram had broken Siva dhanusu.. will be furious which is like adding fuel to fire as his avatar was destined to marginalise the overgrowth of Kshatriyas.
While Parasurama will be very particular to fight with Sri Ram, Sri Ram will respectfully enquire him whether there is any real need for a fight.
But finally when Parasuram sees the real Sri Ram eye to eye, he will realise who Ram actually is and will admire him and move out of the way.

Hari Krishnan
17th August 2005, 06:40 PM
Dear Harikrishnan Sir

Why is Mandodari given such importantance? She is supposed to be a paragon of virtue to be emulated.
But,in Ramayana ,i think she is just a very minor character who does not seem to have done anything to her credit.
She tries to advice Ravana to give back Sita.I dont think Ravana gets angry at her like he got angry with Vibishana.



[tscii:14baa8390d]
ġ 񧼡â Ž â 򾢾. á½ ġ . ׸ á ¾ ¡ Ģ . ' , â á' ( ŢɊ¾) ͧġ á ( ȡ ¡ Ǣ. .) ? ¡, á, , 񧼡â, .

ɧ, áŽ Ţ ý측 ٨ Ţ. â â 츢ȡ.

, . 񧼡â¡ Ţ . . áŽۨ ɡ ¡ Ģɢ . Ţ ¡ ¢ áŽۨ Ţ.

áŽ Ţ 񧼡â . š¡, ɡ. ' Ө ¡! ɡ!' 񧼡⢠째 .

' ¡ ɢ, ,
Ȣ, ¢ , šȡ?
" ɸ ¢
" վ, , Ţɧš šǢ?

ɢ. 'á ġ , š ƸǢ š' š ȡ 񧼡â, .[/tscii:14baa8390d]


Also, i read that she was exceptionally beautiful that Hanuman initially mistook her for Sita.

[tscii:14baa8390d]
. ɡ ۨ š? ̨ Ƹ. ȡɡ, áŽۨ Ģ 񧼡â Ţ, ' ¢ Ч š 츢, š . ( ) š ȡ.

𺢨 θȡ. ɡ š . [/tscii:14baa8390d]


But,saliva was flowing from her mouth in sleep and hence he identified her as a member of rakshasha race.is this true?

[tscii:14baa8390d]

. . . Ţ ʦġ Ţ. ̽ . ' ȡ ʨ ' Цȡ, á½Ǣ. '¡ Ꭰġ ? ¡ ' Ǣ ȡ. 񧼡â ըиȡ Ţ. Ţ 츢ȡ.[/tscii:14baa8390d]



Also, what does the name "Mandodari" mean?
[tscii:14baa8390d]

ø Ƣ ȡ .

վ츼 츢
,

ȨξĢ ̨ 񧼡

. ¢ .

[/tscii:14baa8390d]

S.Balaji
17th August 2005, 06:52 PM
Dear Mr. Badri and Mr. Nov

Again , I am not able to read the postings of Mr. Hari Krishnan

Please address this problem

S.Balaji
17th August 2005, 07:10 PM
[tscii:a65c754e03]
Also, i read that she was exceptionally beautiful that Hanuman initially mistook her for Sita.But,saliva was flowing from her mouth in sleep and hence he identified her as a member of rakshasha race.is this true?

Viggop,

Hanuman , on seeing Mandodari, was amazed by her divine looks and respectable looks and thought for a moment, whether it could be Sita. But immediately he realized his mistake when he recollected , the way Sri Ram described about their relationship and the way Sri Ram loved Sita, and the extent how Sri Ram missing his dear Sita , it is absolute madness to imagine Sita sleeping so peacefully and happily.
Thats how he clears his momentary doubts and starts searching for Sita again.

Here I also have a query I wish Hanuman ought not to have first searched for Sita in the palace of Ravana.
[/tscii:a65c754e03]

Hari Krishnan
17th August 2005, 09:30 PM
Here I also have a query I wish Hanuman ought not to have first searched for Sita in the palace of Ravana.


Balaji,

To wish that way is to presuppose everything. A good, honest, diligent investigator must first eliminate all remote possibilities of the truth going otherwise.

Reliability means not giving in to personal opinions and judgements. As a reliable investigator - Hanuman was not a mere messenger - Hanuman had to do that unpleasant job as well. Then, it may be asked, 'OK, why then he had to start from Ravana - and other's - houses, first? He could have searched other places and later come here.' One has to remember that what the entire Sundara Kandam covers are the events that took place within a matter of 24 hours. The time available for Hanuman was exceedingly short. He therefore started with the negative possibility first.

That is one thing. Another aspect is that, who knew where was Sita kept imprisoned in Lanka? He might have put her in his own gynaeceum ().[/tscii:837e5b7603] Or he might have placed her in some other person's house, like Kumbakarna, Indrajit, Vibishana, etc. Nothing was clear at that time. And the puzzing question is, why Ravana, who had access to all the three worlds chose the Asoka Vana for keeping her in prison. What was the reason behind this peculiar preference, when he had more secure places to keep her imprisoned. Now, if I go into that, we would be branching off into what is known as [tscii:837e5b7603]ɢ ¡[/tscii:837e5b7603] in [tscii:837e5b7603] .[/tscii:837e5b7603]

Therefore, either way, Hanuman had to search all over Lanka. He did not merely search. He practically scoured through the city.

S.Balaji
17th August 2005, 09:55 PM
[tscii:3fd8dfcf21]Mr. Hari Krishnan,

Nice thought provoking posting Thanks My point is . Hanuman was a highly intelligent thinker and with great presence of mind.. All his steps were measured and calculated :

1. While appearing before Sri Ram when he landed at Thandakarunyam, enquiring about Ram and in a very diplomatic way puts forth Sugrivaas plight and the bad treatment from Valee and immediately making the attention of Ram focus on Sugriva as a friend and Valee as a bad element. I would say that it was Hanuman who successfully established the relationship between Ram and Sugriva and paved way for Valees end. Infact Sri Ram himself will appreciate to Lakshmana that Hanuman is an ideal minister and counsel for a successful King.
2. Even after Sita , Hanuman wishes that there should be some message to Ravana and he choses the ransacking of Asoka vanam and proves his might before smartly absorbing Bramasthiram of Indrajit for few moments. He created panic on Ravana by that act
3. When he meets Sri Ram , knowing the anxiety of him, he starts with the words Kanden Karpinukaniyay kangalaal Probably , Hanuman thought that even that micro second of anxiety should not be given to Sri Ram and he chose Kanden as the first word

When such an intelligent person Hanuman , could think for a moment that Mandodari may be Sita.
[/tscii:3fd8dfcf21]

viggop
17th August 2005, 10:06 PM
Dear HariKrishnan Sir
I heard the story that Rakshasha race people will have saliva flowing from their mouth from my grandmother. :-)

I thought that the "pancha kanya" in Hinduism also included Kunthi.Kunthi was granted boon to be kanya forever as she begets karnan before marriage and gets afraid.

Donno whether Sita was mentioned.Also, did Mandodari marry Vibishana after ravana is killed? is this mentioned in Valmiki Ramayana?
I know that tara marries sugriva according to Valmiki Ramayana but kambar shows her as an ascetic.I read your explanation about this in chennaionline that times changed as well as moral values.

when you have time,tell us about the Asokavani ka nyayam.
let us keep this thread moving.

viggop
17th August 2005, 10:06 PM
panchakanyas:-
http://www.indianest.com/hinduism/panchkanya/pk01.htm

Hari Krishnan
17th August 2005, 10:13 PM
[tscii:4b88631fd8]ġ,

Ţ Ȣ Ţ ¡츢. : š â 츢. Ũ ġ:

http://www.harimozhi.com/ListArticle.asp?lngArticleId=26

񧼡â ¡ ¨ Ȣ Ţš:

http://www.harimozhi.com/Article.asp?id=234

째, 째 . 񧼡â째 . ɧ ո '¡' .

š á½, , ¡ ' ' ã¡ ոȡ. (1) ٨ š츢 Ƣ츢. (2) ¢ н, â¡ Ũ . (3) н ¢Ģ󾾡 Ƣ츢. (4) ¢ ý ɧš ɢ¢ Ţ. (5) ý ¡ Ģ â. ( š â ¡, .)

Ţ즸 Ꭰոȡ. š š 츢. ոȡ .


[/tscii:4b88631fd8]

S.Balaji
17th August 2005, 10:15 PM
MY DEAR ADMINISTRATORS AND MODERATORS...

THIS IS MY THIRD POSTING ... I AM NOT ABLE TO VIEW THE POSTINGS OF MR. HARI KRISHNAN.

PROBABLY ITS COMING IN TAMIL ??

PLEASE HELP ME OUT..

I wish to read all his last 3 postings

Hari Krishnan
17th August 2005, 10:31 PM
Dear HariKrishnan Sir
Also, did Mandodari marry Vibishana after ravana is killed? is this mentioned in Valmiki Ramayana?


My god! Let not the progeny of Ravana sue you for libel! :lol:

She dropped dead on the body of Ravana, lamenting.

People get confused between the abduction of Ruma (wife of Sugriva) by Vali, and Sugriva's marrying Tara after his death. The custom according to Valmiki's version is for the race to marry a brother's wife, after his death. (Sugriva was a king for sometime, when Vali was 'believed' to have been killed by Mayavi. At that time, it has to be noted, Sugriva and Tara had no mariltal relations.)

Hari Krishnan
17th August 2005, 10:38 PM
Balaji,

May be the reason why you are not able to read my three posts is that I have written in them in Tamil (tscii). I prefer writing in Tamil, in a Tamil group. I would also suggest that the discussions may be carried on in Tamil from hereon.

NOV
18th August 2005, 07:49 AM
Dear Mr. Badri and Mr. Nov
Again , I am not able to read the postings of Mr. Hari Krishnan
Please address this problemas mentioned by Hari, his posts are in Tamil. You need to have your Murasu Anjal open, to see them.

Hari, dont you think it is better to have the discussion in English, so that it has a wider reach.
alternatively, you can be bilingual.

S.Balaji
18th August 2005, 07:03 PM
Balaji,

May be the reason why you are not able to read my three posts is that I have written in them in Tamil (tscii). I prefer writing in Tamil, in a Tamil group. I would also suggest that the discussions may be carried on in Tamil from hereon.

HariKrishnan,

Appreciate your preference to write in Tamil but pls note that this thread will be viewed by others as well who may not be able to read Tamil and hence from now kindly do your postings in English only.
The ultimate objective should be that the message shall reach everyone , not to a limited set of people.

Best regards

S.Balaji

S.Balaji
18th August 2005, 07:08 PM
[tscii:d1b6bdfca7]
Let's discuss about Ramayana, just like we have been discussing Mahabharath,in full depth, chapter by chapter.
Rama was Lord Vishnu's 9th avatar in Satya Yuga, prior to Dwarpara Yuga, in which Ram, Lakshman, Bharatha and Satrughna, were born to King Dhasratha and his 3 wives, Sumitra, Kaikeyi, and Kausalya in Ayodhya.

Rama was Lord Vishnu's 9th avatar in Satya Yuga, prior to Dwarpara Yuga, in which Ram, Lakshman, Bharatha and Satrughna, were born to King Dhasratha and his 3 wives, Sumitra, Kaikeyi, and Kausalya in Ayodhya.

Dear Raghu,

I just now was going through your first posting when you created this thread..

Rams avatar is Lord Vishnus 7th Avatar

1.Macha
2.Koorma
3.Varaha
4.Narasimha
5.Vamana
6.Parasurama
7.Rama
8.Balarama
9.Krishna
10.Kalki

[/tscii:d1b6bdfca7]

viggop
24th August 2005, 07:28 PM
Ok,Ravana is mad after hearing sambulami is dead.He himself is willing to go and capture this monkey.But his generals(pancha senathipathis) stop him and remind him of his stature."World will laugh when they hear Ravana went to fight with a monkey.Even trimoorthis will laugh.People will think you have ineffecient generals.So let us go" they begged.Ravana agreed.

நீ குரங்கின்மேல் செல்லின்,
முறுவல் பூக்கும் அன்றே, நின்ற மூவர்க்கும் முகங்கள்?

'அன்றியும், உனக்கு ஆள் இன்மை தோன்றுமால், அரச!
வென்றி இல்லவர் மெல்லியோர்தமைச் செல விட்டாய்;
நன்றி இன்று ஒன்று காண்டியேல், எமைச் செல நயத்தி'
என்று, கைதொழுது இறைஞ்சினர்; அரக்கனும் இசைந்தான்

Generals this time took no chances.They prepared a msasive army.50,000 charriots,100,000 horsemen,200,000 cavalry,elephents which were so war hungry that their saliva became a river and charriots which run through that river made it a muddy pool.

ஆறு செய்தன ஆனையின் மதங்கள்; அவ் ஆற்றைச்
சேறு செய்தன தேர்களின் சில்லி;

ஆழித் தேர்த் தொகை ஐம்பதினாயிரம்; அஃதே
சூழிப் பூட்கைக்குத் தொகை; அவற்று இரட்டியின் தொகைய,
ஊழிக் காற்று அன்ன புரவி; மற்று அவற்றினுக்கு இரட்டி,
பாழித் தோள் நெடும் படைக்கலப் பதாதியின் பகுதி

But the rakshasa women knew the outcome already.They begged their husbands not to go and get killed by that monkey.Lovers,Children,wives and mothers all sorrounded asuras and cried and tried to prevent them from going to yamapuri."Not one of you is going to return" they cried.What a bad omen?

தொக்கது ஆம் படை, சுரி குழல் மடந்தையர், தொடிக் கை
மக்கள், தாயர், மற்று யாவரும் தடுத்தனர், மறுகி;
'ஒக்க ஏகுதும், குரங்கினுக்கு உயிர் தர; ஒருவர்
புக்கு மீண்டிலர்' என்று, அழுது இரங்கினர், புலம்பி

Asuras dint listen to their wives.The massive army went like an occean.'Pancha senathipathis went like panchaboothas' writes kamban.And kavichakravarthy himself has he couldnt find any uvamai(simility) to describe the panchasenathipathi's going to war with rage.

கை பரந்து எழு சேனைஅம் கடலிடைக் கலந்தார்;
செய்கைதாம் வரும் தேரிடைக் கதிர் எனச் செல்வார்-
மெய் கலந்த மா நிகர்வரும் உவமையை வென்றார்,
ஐவரும், பெரும் பூதம் ஓர் ஐந்தும் ஒத்து அமைந்தார்

what was their strength?The panchasenathipthis looked so strong that even if attacked with vishnu chakra,rope of varuna,yema's divine weapon,and shiva's trishul ,these pancha senathipathis will feel like needle prick.They had such massive physiques.

These were the senathipathis who opposed indhra earlier.Indhra was on iravatham,the divine elephent.These senathipathis held that massive elephents tail and silenced it by theatening it.They tied Yema with his pasa(rope) and threw him in Ravana's feet earlier.Their massive chest rivals mountains.Their massive shoulders insult occean waves.They were so skilled in murdering that yema himself looked like an apprentice before them.Their eyes are so fiery that even a blacksmith's pyre looked miniscule before them.

இந்திரன் இசை இழந்து ஏகுவான், இகல்
தந்தி முன் கடாவினன் முடுக, தாம் அதன்
மந்தர வால் அடி பிடித்து, 'வல்லையேல்
உந்துதி, இனி' என, வலிந்த ஊற்றத்தார். 20

'பால் நிறுத்து அந்தணன் பணியன் ஆகி, நின்
கோல் நினைத்திலன்' என, உலகம் கூறலும்,
நீல் நிறத்து இராவணன் முனிவு நீக்குவான்,
காலனை, காலினில், கையில், கட்டினார். 21

மலைகளை நகும் தட மார்பர்; மால் கடல்
அலைகளை நகும் நெடுந் தோளர்; அந்தகன்
கொலைகளை நகும் நெடுங் கொலையர்; கொல்லன் ஊது
உலைகளை நகும் அனல் உமிழும் கண்ணினார்

war started.It wasnt much of a war.Vini,vidi,vici....within a second the war was over.The massive army was finished off in a second says kamban

வார் மதக் கரிகளின் கோடு வாங்கி, மாத்
தேர் படப் புடைக்கும்; அத் தேரின் சில்லியால்,
வீரரை உருட்டும்; அவ் வீரர் வாளினால்,
தாருடைப் புரவியைத் துணியத் தாக்குமால். 33

இரண்டு தேர் இரண்டு கைத்தலத்தும் ஏந்தி, வேறு
இரண்டு மால் யானை பட்டு உருள, எற்றுமால்;
இரண்டு மால் யானை கக இரண்டின் ஏந்தி, வேறு
இரண்டு பாலினும் வரும் பரியை எற்றுமால். 34

மா இரு நெடு வரை வாங்கி, மண்ணில் இட்டு,
ஆயிரம்-தேர் பட அரைக்குமால்; அழித்து,
ஆயிரம் களிற்றை ஓர் மரத்தினால் அடித்து,
'ஏ' எனும் மாத்திரத்து எற்றி முற்றுமால். 35

உதைக்கும் வெங் கரிகளை; உழக்கும் தேர்களை;
மிதிக்கும் வன் புரவியை; தேய்க்கும் வீரரை;
மதிக்கும் வல் எழுவினால்; அரைக்கும் மண்ணிடை;
குதிக்கும் வன் தலையிடை; கடிக்கும்; குத்துமால்

viggop
24th August 2005, 07:31 PM
Panchasenathipathis were mad to see this.They attacked hanuman.Within seconds one senathipathi was killed.Seeing this the other 4 fought like kalagni.Hanuman killed one more senathipathi by stamping him on the floor,like how we kill an insect by stamping it.

மதித்த களிற்றினில் வாள் அரிஏறு
கதித்தது பாய்வதுபோல், கதி கொண்டு
குதித்தனன்; மால் வரை மேனி குழம்ப
மிதித்தனன்-வெஞ் சின வீரருள் வீரன்

Seeing this the other 3 became suiciide squads."Why should we live" they roared and fought with hanuman.They went for malyuddha(wrestling).Hanuman hugged two and crushed their bones.He stamped the fifth person's head and killed him.

தாம்பு என வாலின் வரிந்து, உயர் தாளோடு
ஏம்பல் இலார்இரு தோள்கள் இறுத்தான்;
பாம்பு என நீங்கினர், பட்டனர் வீழ்ந்தார்-
ஆம்பல் நெடும் பகைபோல் அவன் நின்றான்

நின்றனன் ஏனையன்; நின்றது கண்டான்;
குன்றிடை வாவுறு கோள் அரி போல,
மின் திரி வன் தலைமீது குதித்தான்;
பொன்றி, அவன், புவி, தேரொடு புக்கான்.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As usual the guards run to tell this to Ravana.He sees them running in.He guesses what they are going to say.This is the third time its happening.The suspense is out.But still he has to hear it from the guards' mouths.Ravana stares at them with fire in his eyes.

"The monkey killed the army and the generals" cried the guards."Only we were spared.After killing all of them the monkey now looks as if its bored" say the guards.

Some funny verse."The monkey looks bored....."....in reality no guard will say like this to Ravana.But kavi chakravarthy finds his own funny sequences.

'தானையும் உலந்தது; ஐவர் தலைவரும் சமைந்தார்; தாக்கப்
போனவர் தம்மில் மீண்டோ ம் யாம், அமர் புரிகிலாமை;
வானையும் வென்றுளோரை வல்லையின் மடிய நூறி,
ஏனையர் இன்மை, சோம்பி இருந்தது, அக் குரங்கும்' என்றார்

viggop
25th August 2005, 10:29 AM
Ravana fumed after hearing this news.He rose as fire rises in anger.But his son atchaya kumaran stopped him.

"If you want to fight with an animal you can fight with the vehicle of 3 eyed lord(nandhi),the mother like bird which carries the one who measured 3 worlds(Garuda),The bed in which that lord sleeps(adisesha) or Asta dig Gajas.Fighting with these animals is befitting your valor.But if you fight against a monkey that is an insult.Dont" he said

'முக்கணான் ஊர்தி அன்றேல், மூன்று உலகு அடியின் தாயோன்
ஒக்க ஊர் பறவை அன்றேல், அவன் துயில் உரகம் அன்றேல்,
திக்கயம் அல்லதேல், புன் குரங்கின்மேல் சேறி போலாம்!
இக் கடன் அடியேற்கு ஈதி; இருத்தி ஈண்டு இனிதின்; எந்தாய்

Tamil plays in this verse.Kamban just doesnt say "nandi,garuda" he praises nandhi as 'முக்கணான் ஊர்தி thus hailing shiva as well as nandhi.But when it comes to Garuda he sings a small sahsranama on it.மூன்று உலகு அடியின் தாயோன் ஒக்க ஊர் பறவை.Kamban brushes of asta dig gajas as 'திக்கயம்'.Nothing special to say about them.Kamban clearly shows he is a sri vaishnavite here.

Akshaya kumara speaks very brave words."what is this animal?It is nothing.Send me.Even if it is an avathar os lord shiva, I will capture it.If this monkey is a reincarnation of the lion that came out of the pillar or the varaha that dug the earth, It doesnt matter.Send me.I will not spare it even if it crosses this universe" he says.

இமையா முக்கண் ஈசனே என்ற போதும்,
நொய்தினின் வென்று, பற்றித் தருகுவென், நொடியில் நுன்பால்.

'தூண்டத் தூண் அகத்துத் தோன்றும் கோளரி, சுடர் வெண் கோட்டு
மண் தொத்த நிமிர்ந்த பன்றி ஆயினும், மலைதல் ஆற்றா;
அண்டத்தைக் கடந்து போகி அப் புறத்து அகலின், என்பால்
தண்டத்தை இடுதி அன்றே, நின்வயின் தந்திலேனேல்!

(There are many sri vaishnavites who claim that Hanuman is lord shiva incarnation.In some hanuman temples we can see a linga image on the wall and hanuman idol standing as a silhoutte.Maybe kamban refered to this itheeka when he equated hanuman with shiva.)

Ravana was happy after hearing this brave words.Which father will not be happy hearing brave words from his son's mouth?He did not think about his son's safety.Akshaya kumaran wasnt as valorous as Indrajit,kumbakarna or pancha senathipathis.But Ravana forgot it.Hearing the brave words of his son he started believeing that his son will defeat this monkey.

He sent akshaya kumara to war like how a father sends his son to school picnic."Go in Indira's charriot" said Ravana.Indira was working as a slave in Lanka.His beautiful charriot was charrioted by Mathalai,Indiras favorite charrioter.Ravana gave that charriot to akshaya kumara.

என, இவை இயம்பி, 'ஈதி விடை' என, இறைஞ்சி நின்ற
வனை கழல் வயிரத் திண் தோள் மைந்தனை மகிழ்ந்து நோக்கி
'துனை பரித் தேர்மேல் ஏறிச் சேறி' என்று இனைய சொன்னான்;
புனை மலர்த் தாரினானும், போர் அணி அணிந்து போனான். 6

ஏறினன் என்ப மன்னோ, இந்திரன் இகலின் இட்ட,
நூறொடு நூறு பூண்ட நொறில் வயப் புரவி நோன் தேர்;
கூறினர் அரக்கர் ஆசி; குமுறின முரசக் கொண்மூ;
ஊறின உரவுத் தானை, ஊழி பேர் கடலை ஒப்ப

A massive army followed akshaya kumara.Kamban gives the number of elephents,charriots and horses that went to war with pancha senathipathis.But now he says that he is unable to count the army that went to war with akshaya kumara."If it is possible to count fish in occean,bubbles in occean,sand in sea shore then it is possible to count the horses,charriots and elephents that went to war with akshaya kumara" he says.

பொரு கடல் மகரம் எண்ணில், எண்ணலாம் பூட்கை; பொங்கித்
திரிவன மீன்கள் எண்ணில், எண்ணலாம் செம் பொன் திண் தேர்;
உரு உறு மணலை எண்ணில், எண்ணலாம் உரவுத் தானை;
வரு திரை நிரையை எண்ணில், எண்ணலாம் வாவும் வாசி

sons of akshayakumara,his close friends,his ministers,their children,children born to Ravana from devaloka women all sorrunded akshayakumara.4 lakh soldiers went as just his body guards.They carried very cruel weapons.Kamban spends one stanza describing these weapons.

மந்திரக் கிழவர் மைந்தர், மதி நெறி அமைச்சர் மக்கள்,
தந்திரத் தலைவர் ஈன்ற தனயர்கள், பிறகும், தாதைக்கு
அந்தரத்து அரம்பைமாரில் தோன்றினர் ஆதி ஆனோர்,
எந்திரத் தேரர், சூழ்ந்தார்-ஈர்-இரண்டு இலக்கம் வீரர். 10

தோமரம், உலக்கை, சூலம், சுடர் மழு, குலிசம், தோட்டி,
ஏ மரு வரி வில், வேல், கோல், ஈட்டி, வாள், எழு, விட்டேறு,
மா மரம், வீசு பாசம், எழு முளை, வயிரத் தண்டு,
காமரு கணையம், குந்தம், கப்பணம், கால நேமி.

"Not only this massive army went to war" says kamban."Crows,vultures,ghosts that eat corpses,yema and karma accumulated over years all followed this doomed army" writes kamban.Crows and vultures were happy about the feast that awaited them.Hearts of wives and lovers followed the army says kamban.

காகமும், கழுகும், பேயும், காலனும், கணக்கு இல் காலம்
சேகு உற வினையின் செய்த தீமையும், தொடர்ந்து செல்ல;
பாகு இயல் கிளவிச் செவ் வாய்ப் படை விழிப் பணைத்த வேய்த் தோள்
தோகையர் மனமும், தொக்க தும்பியும், தொடர்ந்து சுற்ற

viggop
25th August 2005, 10:31 AM
Akshayakumara was not known for his valour,but was known for his beauty.Seeing him hanuman wondered whether this was Indrajit,Ravana or lord subramanya himself.Then by seeing that he doesnt have 10 heads he realized that he wasnt ravana."He did not have 6 heads,so he wasnt subramanya.This is somebody else.Who is it?" wondered maruthi

'பழி இலது உரு என்றாலும், பல் தலை அரக்கன் அல்லன்;
விழிகள் ஆயிரமும் கொண்ட வேந்தை வென்றானும் அல்லன்;
மொழியின், மற்று அவர்க்கு மேலான்; முரண் தொழில் முருகன் அல்லன்;அழிவு இல் ஒண் குமாரன் யாரோ, அஞ்சனக் குன்றம் அன்னான்

But Akshayakumara was disappointed after seeing hanuman.'Did I bring this massive army to fight with this monkey" he wondered.He started abusing Hanuman.But mathalai,the charrioter knew what ego is.He has seen indra suffering from ego and underestimation of opponents.So he warned akshaya kumara."Your father was defeated by a monkey(vali) remember that" he said.

என்றவன், உவந்து, விண் நோய் இந்திர சாபம் என்ன
நின்ற தோரணத்தின் உம்பர் இருந்த ஓர் நீதியானை,
வன் தொழில் அரக்கன் நோக்கி, வாள் எயிறு இலங்க நக்கான்;
'கொன்றது இக் குரங்கு போலாம், அரக்கர்தம் குழாத்தை!' என்றான். 21

அன்னதாம் நகு சொல் கேட்ட சாரதி, 'ஐய! கேண்மோ!
இன்னதாம் என்னல் ஆமோ உலகியல்? இகழல் அம்மா;
மன்னனோடு எதிர்ந்த வாலி குரங்கு என்றால், மற்றும் உண்டோ ?
சொன்னது துணிவில் கொண்டு சேறி' என்று, உணரச் சொன்னான்

War started.First the army fought with hanuman.Nobody knew how the army was destroyed."The fate of charriots was cruel" argued some spectators. "No,no see how the elephents suffered and died.They suffered the most" argued others.The patti mandram went on.Soon there werent anybody to conduct a patti mandapam.All were dead.

'தேரே பட்டன' என்றார் சிலர்; சிலர், 'தெறு கண் செம் முக வயிரத் தோள் பேரே பட்டன' என்றார்; சிலர் சிலர், 'பரியே பட்டன பெரிது' என்றார்;'காரே பட்டன நுதல் ஓடைக் கட கரியே பட்டன கடிது' என்றார்;நேரே பட்டவர் பட, மாடே, தனி, நில்லா உயிரொடு நின்றாரே

Hanuman caught akshayakumara.It wasnt much of a war."He just rubbed him in earth and killed him"says kamban.It was over very quickly.

நீத்து ஆய் ஓடின உதிரப் பெரு நதி நீராக, சிலை பாராக,
போய்த் தாழ் செறி தசை அரி சிந்தினபடி பொங்க, பொரும் உயிர் போகாமுன்,மீத் தாம் நிமிர் சுடர் வயிரக் கைகொடு பிடியா, விண்ணொடு மண் காண,தேய்த்தான்-ஊழியின் உலகு ஏழ்தேயினும்,ஒரு தன்புகழ் இறை தேயாதான்

Something very funny happened.Some asuras were alive.They dint want to fight.They disguised as bhramins thinking hanuman will not kill bhramins.Some took the form of cows thinking that hanuman will not kill cows.Some started chanting Rama nama.Some said "Aiya we surrender to you.Save us"

மீன் ஆய், வேலையை உற்றார், சிலர்; சிலர் பசு ஆய் வழிதொறும் மேய்வுற்றார்;ஊன் ஆர் பறவையின் வடிவு ஆனார் சிலர்; சிலர் நான்மறையவர் உரு ஆனார்;மான் ஆர் கண் இள மடவார் ஆயினர் முன்னே, தம் குழல் வகிர்வுற்றார் ஆனால் சிலர்; சிலர், 'ஐயா! நின் சரண்' என்றார்; நின்றவர் 'அரி' என்றார்

viggop
25th August 2005, 10:32 AM
Nobody went to tell this news to Ravana now.Asura women came running and started crying over the corpses.mandothari herself heard the news and went and fell in feet of Ravana and cried in pain and anguish.Oh, what a sight.....Queen of lankapuri was crying for the first time....who else can describe this pathos more better than kamban?

குண்டலக் குழை முகக் குங்குமக் கொங்கையார்,
வண்டு அலைத்து எழு குழல் கற்றை கால் வருடவே,
விண்டு, அலத்தக விரைக் குமுத வாய் விரிதலால்,
அண்டம் உற்றுளது, அவ் ஊர் அழுத பேர் அமலையே

தா இல் வெஞ் செரு நிலத்திடை, உலந்தவர்த(ம்)மேல்,
ஓவியம் புரை நலார் விழுதொறும், சிலர் உயிர்த்து,
ஏவு கண்களும் இமைத்திலர்களாம்; இது எலாம்
ஆவி ஒன்று, உடல் இரண்டு, ஆயதாலேகொலாம்?

தீட்டு வாள் அனைய கண் தெரிவை, ஓர் திரு அனாள்,
ஆட்டில்நின்று அயர்வது ஓர் அறு தலைக் குறையினைக்
கூட்டி, 'நின் ஆர் உயிர்த் துணைவன், எம் கோனை, நீ,
காட்டுவாயாதி' என்று, அழுது கை கூப்பினாள்

"You said we have one life and two bodies.Now where is that life and body" cried a rakshasa woman who couldnt find her lovers body or life.Some fell on the corpses and dint speak anything.Some forgot to even blink.

கயல் மகிழ் கண் இணை கலுழி கான்று உக,
புயல் மகிழ் புரி குழல் பொடி அளாவுற,
அயன் மகன் மகன் மகன் அடியின் வீழ்ந்தனள்,
மயன் மகள்; வயிறு அலைத்து அலறி மாழ்கினாள். 48

தா அருந் திரு நகர்த் தையலார் முதல்
ஏவரும், இடை விழுந்து இரங்கி ஏங்கினார்;
காவலன் கால்மிசை விழுந்து, காவல் மாத்
தேவரும் அழுதனர், களிக்கும் சிந்தையார்

Mandothari fell at feet of Ravana and cried in agony.The guards came slowly.Now they dint have anything to say.They too fell at ravana's feet and cried in pain.

viggop
26th August 2005, 10:44 AM
Ravana did not fume this time.He was thunderstuck.He did not react.But another guy reacted.He was Indrajith."Did that monkey stamp my brother?No it did not.It stamped my father's glory under its feet" he roared.Tears oozed like rivers from his eyes.

தம்பியை உன்னும்தோறும், தாரை நீர் ததும்பும் கண்ணான்,
வம்பு இயல் சிலையை நோக்கி, வாய் மடித்து உருத்து நக்கான்;
'கொம்பு இயல் மாய வாழ்க்கைக் குரங்கினால், குரங்கா ஆற்றல்
எம்பியோ தேய்ந்தான்? எந்தை புகழ் அன்றோ தேய்ந்தது?' என்றான்

He went to meet Ravana.Ravana was not fuming this time.He was in deep thought..Indrajit went and fell at his feet and cried.

"You know what a monkey can do.Vali did that to you.After seeing it why did you send people seperately and get them killed?Kinkaras are no match to it.You sent them and killed them.Next sambumali,panchasenathipathis and akshayakumara..all these are no match to that monkey.Yet you sent them thinking what this monkey can do.You forgot vali." said Indrajith

தாள் இணை வீழ்ந்தான், தம்பிக்கு இரங்குவான்; தறுகணானும்
தோள் இணை பற்றி ஏந்தித் தழுவினன், அழுது சோர்ந்தான்;
வாள் இணை நெடுங் கண் மாதர் வயிறு அலைத்து அலறி மாழ்க,
மீளிபோல் மொய்ம்பினானும் விலக்கினன்; விளம்பலுற்றான்


'ஒன்று நீ உறுதி ஓராய்; உற்றிருந்து உளையகிற்றி,
வன் திறல் குரங்கின் ஆற்றல் மரபுளி உணர்ந்தும், அன்னோ!
"சென்று நீர் பொருதிர்" என்று, திறத் திறம் செலுத்தி, தேயக்
கொன்றனை நீயே அன்றோ, அரக்கர்தம் குழுவை எல்லாம்

"What can I do?I thought this was an ordinary monkey.Now only I realize that it has power of trimoorthis" said Ravana.He clearly avoids vali.That defeat still irks him.So he brings in trimoorthis into the topic.When hanuman meets him, there will be a hilarious incident on vali.Hanuman will refer to him and see Ravana's reaction to it.

'கிங்கரர், சம்புமாலி, கேடு இலா ஐவர், என்றுஇப்
பைங் கழல் அரக்கரோடும் உடன் சென்ற பகுதிச் சேனை,
இங்கு ஒருபேரும் மீண்டார் இல்லையேல், குரங்கு அது, எந்தாய்!
சங்கரன், அயன், மால், என்பார்தாம் எனும் தகையது ஆமே

Indrajith then went to war.He was deeply disturbed.'This is just one monkey.To fight this almost all my armies have been wiped it.If Rama comes with a monkey army,with which army will I oppose him?" he thought.This is exactly why Hanuman started this war.He wanted to psychologically destroy asura confidence.He wanted them to shiver in fear.He did not want them to think hust monkeys and humans are coming.He succeeded in that mission.

வெப்பு அடைகில்லா நெஞ்சில், சிறியது ஓர் விம்மல் கொண்டான்;
'அப்பு அடை வேலை அன்ன பெருமையார், ஆற்றலோடும்
ஒப்பு அடைகில்லார், எல்லாம் உலந்தனர்; குரங்கும் ஒன்றே!
எப் படை கொண்டு வெல்வது, இராமன் வந்து எதிர்க்கின்?' என்றான்

While going to war Indrajith saw corpses all around.He went there fuming and crying.He saw his brother's mutiliated body.He couldnt control himself."yema himself is afraid of you.He will run and hide in another world if he sees you.To which world then did you go after your death?" he cried.

'வெவ் இலை அயில் வேல் உந்தை வெம்மையைக் கருதி, ஆவி
வவ்வுதல் கூற்றும் ஆற்றான்; மாறு மாறு உலகின் வாழ்வார்,
அவ் உலகத்து உளாரும், அஞ்சுவர் ஒளிக்க; ஐயா!
எவ் உலகத்தை உற்றாய், எம்மை நீத்து, எளிதின்? எந்தாய்

After Hanuman saw Indrajith he knew that the game was over.He knew that he couldnt kill Indrajith.In whole of lanka only two people were there who could have defeated hanuman.One was Indrajith and the other was Kumbakarna."Ok now its either defeat or victory.This is indrajith" thinks hanuman

'வென்றேன், இதன் முன், சில வீரரை என்னும் மெய்ம்மை
அன்றே முடுகிக் கடிது எய்த அழைத்தது அம்மா!
ஒன்றே, இனி வெல்லுதல் தோற்றல்; அடுப்பது உள்ளது
இன்றே சமையும்; இவன் இந்திரசித்து!' என்பான்

Asura army came first.As usual kamban plays a word game here.writing war descriptions isnt easy.Vyasa and homer are renowned for their descriptions of war.Kalki says

லட்சக்கணக்கான வீரர்களும் ஆயிரம் பதினாயிரக்கணக்கான யானைகளும் குதிரைகளும் ஈடுபட்டிருந்த அந்த மாபெரும் யுத்தத்தை நடந்தது நடந்தபடி வர்ணிப்பது நம்மால் இயலாத காரியம். வால்மீகியையும் வியாசரையும் ஹோமரையும் கம்பரையும் போன்ற மகா நாடக ஆசிரியர்களுக்குத்தான் அதன் வர்ணனை சாத்தியமாகும்

So we can understand that kamban is matchless in his war descriptions.See how he describes the war between rakshasa army and hanuman here.

viggop
26th August 2005, 10:46 AM
Hanuman vs elephents

உதையுண்டன யானை; உருண்டன யானை; ஒன்றோ?
மிதியுண்டன யானை; விழுந்தன யானை; மேல் மேல்,
புதையுண்டன யானை; புரண்டன யானை; போரால்
வதையுண்டன யானை; மறிந்தன யானை, மண்மேல்

Hanuman vs charriots

முடிந்த தேர்க் குலம்; முறிந்தன தேர்க் குலம்; முரண் இற்று
இடிந்த தேர்க் குலம்; இற்றன தேர்க் குலம்; அச்சு இற்று
ஒடிந்த தேர்க் குலம்; உக்கன தேர்க் குலம்; நெக்குப்
படிந்த தேர்க் குலம்; பறிந்தன தேர்க் குலம், படியில்.

Hanuman vs horses

சிரன் நெரிந்தவும், கண் மணி சிதைந்தவும், செறி தாள்
தரன் நெரிந்தவும், முதுகு இறச் சாய்ந்தவும், தார் பூண்
உரன் நெரிந்தவும், உதிரங்கள் உமிழ்ந்தவும், ஒளிர் பொற்
குரன் நெரிந்தவும், கொடுங் கழுத்து ஒடிந்தவும் - குதிரை

Hanuman vs cavalry

பிடியுண்டார்களும், பிளத்தலுண்டார்களும், பெருந் தோள்
ஒடியுண்டார்களும், தலை உடைந்தார்களும், உருவக்
கடியுண்டார்களும், கழுத்து இழந்தார்களும், கரத்தால்
அடியுண்டார்களும், அச்சமுண்டார்களும்-அரக்கர்

These are the words of a Genius play writer.Nowhere in world,no author except vyasa and homer comes closer to describing war as beautifully as kamban.

Indrajith then started a massive war with hanuman.He saw a smiling hanuman.He swore.See the word game here.See how kamban writes the swearing in beautiful 'konju tamil' words.See the simility(uvamai)

'நல்லை! நல்லை! இஞ் ஞாலத்துள், நின் ஒக்க நல்லார்
இல்லை! இல்லையால்! எறுழ் வலிக்கு யாரொடும் இகல
வல்லை! வல்லை! இன்று ஆகும், நீ படைத்துள வாழ்நாட்கு
எல்லை! எல்லை!' என்று, இந்திரசித்துவும் இசைந்தான்

Kamban goes to the zenith when describing this war.Before this all wars were between unequals.Nobody was a match to hanuman.But now this is a clas of titans.Two giants fight with each other.Words flow like torrent from the mouth of kamban.
Indrajith sees hanuman and is awestruck by his valor and strength.See the simility of this verse.

அனுமனனப் பார்த்தான்;
மாக வன் திசை பத்தொடும் வரம்பு இலா உலகிற்கு
ஏக நாதனை எறுழ் வலித் தோள் பிணித்து ஈர்த்த
மேக நாதனும், மயங்கினனாம் என வியந்தான்

Hanuman destroys charriot of indrajith

நீண்ட வீரனும், நெடுந் தடக் கைகளை நீட்டி,
ஈண்டு வெஞ் சரம் எய்தன எய்திடாவண்ணம்,
மீண்டு போய் விழ வீசி, ஆங்கு அவன் மிடல் தடந் தேர்
பூண்ட பேயொடு, சாரதி தரைப்பட, புடைத்தான்

Indrajith hides hanuman in panatha karam(darkening of sun by rain of arrows)

ஊழிக் காற்று அன்ன ஒரு பரித் தேர் அவண் உதவ,
பாழித் தோளவன், அத் தடந் தேர்மிசைப் பாய்ந்தான்;
ஆழிப் பல் படை அனையன, அளப்ப அருஞ் சரத்தால்,
வாழிப் போர் வலி மாருதி மேனியை மறைத்தான்

Hanuman jumps on indrajith,destroys his bow and piles of arrows.

கொற்ற மாருதி, மற்றவன் தேர்மிசைக் குதித்து,
பற்றி வன் கையால், பறித்து எழுந்து, உலகு எலாம் பல கால்
முற்றி வென்ற போர் மூரி வெஞ் சிலையினை, முறித்தான்

Devas come in sky to see this war.They cannot control their joy.They dance and whistle like spectators.

ஆர்த்த வானவர் ஆகுலம் கொண்டு, அறிவு அழிந்தார்;

Hanuman now is bleeding.He is tired.He loses his power.But still Hanuman hits head of indrajith

ஊறு, தன் நெடு மேனியில், பல பட, ஒல்கி,
ஏறு சேவகன் தூதனும், சிறிது போது இருந்தான்

தூர்த்த வாளிகள் துணிபட முறை முறை சுற்றி,
போர்த்த பொன் நெடு மணி முடித் தலையிடைப் புடைத்தான்

Hanuman now takes viswaroopa.Indrajith now has no options.He has to use the bhrammasthra.He uses it.

பூவும், பூ நிற அயினியும், தீபமும், புகையும்,
தா இல் பாவனையால் கொடுத்து, அருச்சனை சமைத்தான்;
தேவு யாவையும், உலகமும், திருத்திய தெய்வக்
கோவில் நான்முகன் படைக்கலம் தடக் கையில் கொண்டான். 54

கொண்டு, கொற்ற வெஞ் சிலை நெடு நாணொடும் கூட்டி,
சண்ட வேகத்த மாருதி தோளொடும் சாத்தி,
மண் துளங்கிட, மாதிரம் துளங்கிட, மதி தோய்
விண் துளங்கிட, மேருவும் துளங்கிட, விட்டான்

"Mountain fell" writes kamban."when Maruthi fell , Dharma had tears in his eyes" writes kamban.

திண்ணென் யாக்கையைத் திசைமுகன் படை சென்று திருக,
அண்ணல் மாருதி, அன்று, தன் பின் சென்ற அறத்தின்
கண்ணின் நீரொடும், கனக தோரணத்தொடும், கடை நாள்,
தண்ணென் மா மதி கோளொடும் சாய்ந்தென, சாய்ந்தான்


Asura army was over joyed.Their joy knew no bounds.Kamban spends rest of this chapter describing the mad rantings of asura army."They hooted more happily than the day they saw their archrival indira being tied and dragged into lanka by indrajith" says kamban

வந்து இரைந்தனர், மைந்தரும், மகளிரும்; மழைபோல்,
அந்தரத்தினும், விசும்பினும், திசைதொறும் ஆர்ப்பார்;
முந்தி உற்ற பேர் உவகைக்கு ஓர் கரை இலை; மொழியின்,
இந்திரன் பிணிப்புண்ட நாள் ஒத்தது, அவ் இலங்கை.

Ohh..maruthi...we leave you tied and bound today.Tears flow not only from your eyes but from our eyes also.Nobody can tie you except love and affection.You cannot be tied by bhrammasthra also.But you willingly got tied by it because of your love on sathur muga bhramman.

S.Balaji
26th August 2005, 11:04 AM
Viggop,

One query....

I understand, Hanuman knew that Brahmastra is coming but he had obtained a boon from Brahma that it will not kill him but for few moments.... ( sila muhurtha neram ) it will make him powerless However, as he is a Chiranjeevi......it will not harm him....
Hanuman also will respect the Brahmastram and will surrender to the astra...
Besides , he wanted this to take it an opportunity to see Ravana eye to eye ...

Can you please clarify this

viggop
26th August 2005, 11:41 AM
Balaji
I think you are right.He knows that the brahmaastra will not kill him as he is a chiranjeevi.But it'll render him unconscious for a while.Hanuman will regain conciousness even when he is dragged through the streets of lanka but will not do anything because he wants to see Ravana now.He could have easily freed himself.

S.Balaji
26th August 2005, 11:54 AM
[tscii:72a5d0da37]Dear Viggop,

Thanks for the clarification. Pls continue with your good work. Pl continue with the same sequence of events.so that we can follow your postings
Great show by you.

Can you also pls ref to Valmiki Ramayanam simultneously and enlighten us

Can you also pls explain us on the various occasions where there is a disconnect between Valmiki ramayan and Kambaramayanam by giving reference to both the quotes...[/tscii:72a5d0da37]

viggop
26th August 2005, 02:30 PM
Hi Balaji
I have put this in this thread before.I'm just copying and pasting this from another place.You can read www.harimozhi.com where HariKrishnan Sir has written lot of articles on the Ramayana and Kambar/Valmiki

viggop
27th August 2005, 11:38 AM
Asuras were angry."'எய்யுமின்; ஈருமின்; எறிமின்; போழுமின்;
கொய்யுமின் குடரினை; கூறு கூறுகள் செய்யுமின்; மண்ணிடைத் தேய்மின்; தின்னுமின்; they roared.கொலை செய்ய முயல்கின்றார், சிலர்.

Now the guards finally had some good news to tell Ravana."Bhrammasthra worked.Your son captured that monkey" they shouted in glee.

தூதுவர் ஓடினர்; தொழுது, தொல்லை நாள்
மாதிரம் கடந்தவற் குறுகி, 'மன்ன! நின்
காதலன் மரை மலர்க் கடவுள் வாளியால்,
ஏதில் வானரம் பிணிப்புண்டதாம்' என்றார்

See Ravana's reaction

ஆரம் கொண்டு, எதிர்
நீட்டினன் - உவகையின் நிமிர்ந்த நெஞ்சினான்

"He lifted his chest in happiness" writes kamban.It was his son who attained this victory.Naturally he was happy.He gave a necklace as gift.

Indrajith introduces hanuman to Ravana.See the introduction'அரி உருவான ஆண்தகை,--"Lion like male"-he says.He doesnt even say 'monkey'.He now has full respect for hanuman.Valor recognizes valor.

'நேமியோ? குலிசியோ? நெடுங் கணிச்சியோ?
தாமரைக் கிழவனோ? தறுகண் பல் தலைப்
பூமி தாங்கு ஒருவனோ?-

"who are you?Are you shiva?Vishnu?Yema?"-Roared Ravana.

'என் இவண் வரவு? நீ யாரை?

why are you?Why did you come here? He asked.

see how hanuman introduces himself.

வாலி-தன் மகன், அவன்தன் தூதன் வந்தனென், தனியேன்' என்றான்

"I am messenger of vali's son angatha" says hanuman.

Angatha played with ravana when he was a kid.Vali tied ravana on the pram of angatha and angatha used to tease ravana.That thought kills self respect of ravana,whenever he thinks of it.Now after Hanuman says angatha he is reminded of that incident.Immeditly he asks about vali as if vali was his long time friend and hanuman came on a good will visit.Ravana doesnt know that vali is dead till now.He fears that he might offend vali by injuring hanuman.So he starts talking smoothly to pacify hanuman.

'வாலி சேய் விடுத்த தூத!
வன் திறல் ஆய வாலி வலியன்கொல்? அரசின் வாழ்க்கை
நன்றுகொல்?' என்னலோடும், நாயகன் தூதன் நக்கான்

"How is vali?How is his life?" asks Ravana.Hanuman laughs sarcastically.

'அஞ்சலை, அரக்க! பார் விட்டு அந்தரம் அடைந்தான் அன்றே,
வெஞ் சின வாலி; மீளான்; வாலும் போய் விளிந்தது அன்றே;
அஞ்சன மேனியான்தன் அடு கணை ஒன்றால் மாழ்கித்
துஞ்சினன்; எங்கள் வேந்தன், சூரியன் தோன்றல்' என்றான்

"Dont be afraid ravana.Vali is dead.His tail is also dead.My lord killed him with one single arrow" said Hanuman.

See the sarcasm.he reminds ravana about the tail of vali.The tail in which he tied Ravana and dragged him all over the forest.

Ravana couldnt believe himself."Who killed him?How this happened?Where is that Raman now?" he asks.

'என்னுடை ஈட்டினான், அவ் வாலியை எறுழ் வாய் அம்பால்
இன் உயிர் உண்டது? இப்போது யாண்டையான் இராமன் என்பான்?

Hanuman then narrates vali vatham.Ravana is disgusted at act of sukreeva.His brothers never left him till now for any of his acts.So how can sugreeva let vali down?So Ravana starts abusing sugreeva.

'உம் குலத் தலைவன், தன்னோடு ஒப்பு இலா உயர்ச்சியோனை
வெங் கொலை அம்பின் கொன்றார்க்கு ஆள்-தொழில் மேற்கொண்டீரேல்,
எங்கு உலப்புறும் நும் சீர்த்தி? நும்மொடும் இயைந்தது என்றால்,
மங்குலின் பொலிந்த ஞாலம் மாதுமை உடைத்து மாதோ! 83

'தம்முனைக் கொல்வித்து, அன்னாற் கொன்றவற்கு அன்பு சான்ற
உம் இனத் தலைவன் ஏவ, யாது எமக்கு உரைக்கலுற்றது?
எம் முனைத் தூது வந்தாய்! இகல் புரி தன்மை என்னை?
நும்மினைக் கொல்லாம்; நெஞ்சம் அஞ்சலை; நுவல்தி' என்றான்

"Shame on sugreeva.He has become slave of the murderer of his brother.And you say you are the messengher of such a cheap natured person.I dont want to listen to anything which you say.I can even kill you.It isnt a sin" said Ravana.

Hanuman then advised him to let off seetha.After a very long advise he says "சீதையைத் தருக"

Ravana laughs at this."A monkey advising me.Great " he laughs.Then he gets wild."To hell with your advise.Monkey coming as messenger to humans.Nice humor.By the way,If you are a messenger,you should not have killed my men.Why did you do so?" he roared.

'இவை சொல்லியது, எற்கு, ஒரு
குன்றின் வாழும் குரங்குகொலாம்! இது
நன்று! நன்று!' என மா நகை செய்தனன் -
வென்றி என்று ஒன்றுதான் அன்றி வேறு இலான்

'குரக்கு வார்த்தையும், மானிடர் கொற்றமும்,
இருக்க; நிற்க; நீ, என்கொல், அடா! இரும்
புரத்தினுள் தரும் தூது புகுந்தபின்
அரக்கரைக் கொன்றது? அஃது உரையாய்!' என்றான்

'I dint know how to find you.So i tortured guards to show you.They tried to kill me.So I killed them" said hanuman.Actually now his job is over.He is no more interested in talking to Ravana.He wants to go back soon before the 1 month dead line of seetha.

'காட்டுவார் இன்மையால், கடி காவினை
வாட்டினேன்; என்னைக் கொல்ல வந்தார்களை
வீட்டினேன்;

Ravana is totally infuriated.' கொல்மின்' he roared.
'நில்மின்' என்றனன், வீடணன் நீதியான்

'Stop' said veebeshna.

After veebeshnas advise ravan orders Hanuman's tail to be burnt.lanka dhaganam happened next.

Kamban describes burning of lanka in one full episode.Whole lanka burns.Ravana's palace also burns.He escapes with his family in pushpaka vimana."How did this happen?" he asks."Monkey did that" reply his guards.Ravana's rage knows no bounds."Great,great.devas will laugh at my valor" he laughs.

அனைய காலையில் அரக்கனும், அரிவையர் குழுவும்,
புனை மணிப் பொலி புட்பக விமானத்துப் போனார்;
நினையும் மாத்திரை யாவரும் நீங்கினர்; நினையும்
வினை இலாமையின், வெந்தது, அவ் விலங்கல்மேல் இலங்கை

'இறையோய்!
தரங்க வேலையின் நெடிய தன் வால் இட்ட தழலால்,
குரங்கு சுட்டது ஈது' என்றலும், இராவணன் கொதித்தான். 39

'இன்று புன் தொழில் குரங்குதன் வலியினால், இலங்கை
நின்று வெந்து, மா நீறு எழுகின்றது; நெருப்புத்
தின்று தேக்கிடுகின்றது; தேவர்கள் சிரிப்பார்;
நன்று! நன்று! போர் வலி' என, இராவணன் நக்கான்

Kamban ends this with Hanuman leaving lanka.

viggop
27th August 2005, 11:45 AM
Actually, Vali was performing his prayers in the morning.At this time, Ravana goes to Kishkinda palace and calls out to Vali to come and fight with him.Sugriva answers the door and sarcastically tells Ravana where to find Vali.Ravana goes there to find Vali in his morning prayers.Instead of challenging Vali to a fight after he has finished his prayers, he sneaks up behind Vali trying to attack him in stealth.But, Vali comes to know about this and captures Ravana using his tail.Then, as if nothing happened, he jumps into the sea and dips himself 3 times in it holding ravana under water for a long time.
Then, he comes to kishkinda and then shows it to baby angada."See my son, i've got a 10 head insect for you to play with".

That is why Hanuman says that Vali's tail is also dead to infuriate Ravana

S.Balaji
27th August 2005, 11:59 AM
[tscii:d5ffc2a96b]Viggop,

Pl clarify on this.

I understand, Ravana got a boon that he cannot be killed by any living being however he did not bother to ask for Human being as in his opinion. Human beings can dare to touch him.
I wonder how Valee could trouble Ravana as asper the boon he had obtained Valee should have been an easy prey for Ravana.Valee is from ape race How there is a disconnect here..
[/tscii:d5ffc2a96b]

viggop
27th August 2005, 12:34 PM
Ravana when asking for the boon ignored animals and humans.
He only asked that he should not be killed by asuras,devas,Gods etc. Vali is not a asura or deva race.he is a monkey.

S.Balaji
28th August 2005, 04:07 PM
[tscii:1df5c95baa]Viggop,

I understand, Indrajit had high respect for Hanuman as a warrior. He was also worried about the way.. the asuras tied Hanuman with various things and was damn sure that all these will make Bramastra very weak and Hanuman will come out soon.He will express his anguish to the soldiers to stop from doing such things but it would have been too late for they had already taken Hanuman to the streets and finally to Ravana


[/tscii:1df5c95baa]

viggop
29th August 2005, 11:25 AM
மன்றலின் வந்து, மணத் தவிசு ஏறி,
வென்றி நெடுந் தகை வீரனும், ஆர்வத்து
இன் துணை அன்னமும், எய்தி இருந்தார்;
ஒன்றிய போகமும் யோகமும் ஒத்தார்

Rama and the swan,seetha sat in the pandal like yogam and bogam being together.(Married life is not only boga,but is also a yoga..)

இராமனுக்குச் சீதையைச் சனகன் தாரை வார்த்துக் கொடுத்தல்

கோமகன் முன் சனகன், குளிர் நல் நீர்,
'பூமகளும் பொருளும் என, நீ என்
மா மகள் தன்னொடும் மன்னுதி' என்னா,
தாமரை அன்ன தடக் கையின், ஈந்தான்

My lakshmi like daughter from today is your daughter" said janakan.He gave the lotus like hand of seetha to Ishvaku dynasty.

இராமன் சீதையின் கையைப் பற்றி, தீ வலம் வருதல்

இடம் படு தோளவனோடு, இயை வேள்வி
தொடங்கிய வெங் கனல் சூழ் வரு போதின்,
மடம் படு சிந்தையள், மாறு பிறப்பின்,
உடம்பு உயிரைத் தொடர்கின்றதை ஒத்தாள்

When the divine couple went around the fire,seetha followed Rama like how body follows life even in rebirth.

கேகயன் மா மகள் கேழ் கிளர் பாதம்,
தாயினும் அன்பொடு தாழ்ந்து வணங்கி,
ஆய தன் அன்னை அடித் துணை சூடி,
தூய சுமித்திரை தாள் தொழலோடும்

Rama worshipped the feet of kaikeyi first.Rama worshipped her feet with more love than that of his mother kousalya.Then he sought the blessings of kousalya and sumathra.

அன்னமும், அன்னவர் அம் பொன் மலர்த் தாள்
சென்னி புனைந்தாள்; சிந்தை உவந்தார்,
கன்னி, அருந்ததி, காரிகை, காணா,
'நல் மகனுக்கு இவள் நல் அணி' என்றார்

The 3 mother-in-law's were happy when the swan like seetha also worshipped their feet."You are a crown jewel to our good son" they said.

'எண் இல கோடி பொன், எல்லை இல் கோடி
வண்ண அருங் கலம், மங்கையர் வெள்ளம்,
கண் அகல் நாடு, உயர் காசொடு தூசும்,
பெண்ணின் அணங்கு அனையாள் பெறுக!' என்றார்

"Let this queen of women get countless amount of wealth,vessels,land and all wealth" blessed the 3 mother-in-law's.

devas showered flowers,kings showered gold,others showered flowers..the whole sky glowed by this showers.

வானவர் பூ மழை, மன்னவர் பொன் பூ,
ஏனையர் தூவும் இலங்கு ஒளி முத்தம்,
தான் நகு நாள்மலர், என்று இவை தம்மால்,
மீன் நகு வானின் விளங்கியது, இப் பார்

viggop
29th August 2005, 11:30 AM
The interesting thing here is that Rama falls at the feet of Kaikeyi first.Only then , he falls at the feet of his mother Kaushalya.He loved Kaikeyi equally as his own mother.But Kaikeyi was also the favourite of Dasaratha.
Actually, when Kooni goes and tells that Rama is going to be crowned king, Kaikeyi is very happy and gives her a pearl necklace.Kooni gets angry and says that this event will bring her lot of danger.Kaikeyi asks kooni,i'm the mother who bore Rama.What harm will come to Rama's mother? Even though she did not give birth to Rama,she loves him like her own son.Finally, Gooni uses her insecurity and clouds her mind.

Harikrishnan Sir has dealt with this extensively in www.harimozhi.com and also in his chennaionline series.

S.Balaji
29th August 2005, 07:33 PM
Dear Viggop,

From Sundara Gandam, you have gone backwards !!

I thought you are going to maintain the sequence... Hanuman meeting Ravana and what happens afterwards...

Request , pls follow a sequence... You are doing a great job.....

Through you , we are all having a go at Kamba ramayanam...

Continue this good work...

viggop
29th August 2005, 09:05 PM
Balaji
I'm copying and pasting here and whatever the author posts in another forum,i'll paste it here. It is not my original work.Sorry!

S.Balaji
29th August 2005, 09:23 PM
Balaji
I'm copying and pasting here and whatever the author posts in another forum,i'll paste it here. It is not my original work.Sorry!

Its ok but still I will request you to follow a sequence...

I wish you pls continue with where you left ... Hanuman meeting Ravana...

So that the sequence is followed easily... whatever queries or questions that come up can be easily responded...

Raghu
6th September 2005, 08:17 PM
Dear all

I have question about Rameshwaram, Rama was Shiva baktha, he before crossing the Indian ocean to lanka will perform a ritual on the sea side by making a Shiva Lingam on the sea shore and conduct a pooja with Laksman and Hanuman. Maheshwar will appear infront of Rama and grant him a boon, does any one remember what this varam was?

and so this Place became Rameshwaram, i heard that Shiva lingam made out of sand is still there, any clarification on this?

S.Balaji
6th September 2005, 08:42 PM
[tscii:45656f1c37]
Raghu,

Pl browse the website and you will get the answer for your query


http://www.urday.com/rameshwarnath.htm


There is also another version saying that... Rama , after the war, came here and did pooja to Shiva to get rid of the Brahmahathi Dosham which he got because of killing Ravana..
I am not sure on the second version..

[/tscii:45656f1c37]

S.Balaji
6th September 2005, 08:47 PM
Another interesting feature is, while people from South India travel to Varanasi to have a dharshan of Lord Kasi Vishvanathar and to have a dip at Ganga...

People from North India always make it a point to visit Rameshwaram amongst all the temples of the South to have a dip in various wells... to purify themselves...

Raghu
6th September 2005, 09:22 PM
Balaji anNe

Thanks for the Wonder full link abt Iswar, I hear that if you stand on the Rameshwaram Gopuram, that you can see Maanar or Jaffna, is this true?

S.Balaji
6th September 2005, 09:50 PM
Balaji anNe

Thanks for the Wonder full link abt Iswar, I hear that if you stand on the Rameshwaram Gopuram, that you can see Maanar or Jaffna, is this true?

Dear Raghu,

Actually the distance is several nautical miles... I am not sure about this...as the distance should be roughly 30 kms...

The gap which is very very close between India and SriLanka is from Kodikarai.. I think

viggop
8th September 2005, 10:33 AM
I thought that a place called Nagabooshanam was nearest to Lanka.
DanushKodi was wiped out by sea recently."danush" means bow and so the name is asscociated with Lord Rama

Sandeep
8th September 2005, 11:11 AM
Quick question : Why did Rama ask Sita to go through Agnipariksha.

Doesnt that show lack of trust and lack of confidence on part of Rama. Arent these two emotions too 'human' to suite Rama

viggop
8th September 2005, 11:35 AM
Sandeep
HariKrishnan Sir is writing a detailed article in chennaionline about agnipareeksha.He had given the link somewhere in previous pages.You can follow that.

Rama is human.If he has not been human, he would have never been able to kill Ravana.Ravana was protected by a boon from Brahma that Devas,Gods,rakshashas should not kill him.He considered humans too puny.So, Vishnu took avatar as a human being to use this loophole and finish off the demon Ravana.

Sandeep
8th September 2005, 01:01 PM
Sorry I came in too late :(

Slowly reading through the earlier post. Should reach with you guys soon.

Raghu
8th September 2005, 02:28 PM
Ravana was protected by a boon from Brahma that Devas,Gods,rakshashas should not kill him.He considered humans too puny.So, Vishnu took avatar as a human being to use this loophole and finish off the demon Ravana.

No No I don'tthink so, viggop anNe, Ravana was Shiva Bahktha , it was Maheshwar who granted the boon, that Ravana was an amarn, and as Ravana's mind was full of ego and greed, he 4got to mention humans in whild he was requesting a boon from Maha Iswar

Raghu
8th September 2005, 02:31 PM
There is place in Sri Lanka, eastern Sri Lanka,wher it has 7 fountain like wells, which was according to vedic scriptures were made by Ravana by splitting the earth with his mighty sword, i think it is called 'Ravana Neerootru' .

Can some one, esp lankan friends clarify these?

viggop
8th September 2005, 06:22 PM
Raghu
Ravana got the boon from Brahma,not Shiva. He became devoitee of Shiva later.He was so arrogant that he once asked "Who is Shankara".

will tell u the story.He went to Himalayas,fought with his half-brother Kubera,abrogated the flying chariot and was returning from Himalayas.He has about to crossover Mt.Kailash.Nandi came and stopped him and asked him to around Kailash instead of above it as Lord Shiva and Parvathi were playing with each other.The arrogant Ravana cried out to Nandi - "Who is Shankara" and refused to circumbulate Kailash.He asked Nandi to ask Shiva to come to a fight with him.It was only now that Ravana shook the entire Himalayas to show his power to Lord Shiva.
Parvathi got frightened and hug Shiva saying "My Lord, the mountain is shaking". Only, then, SHiva put his toe down and this arrogant fellow could do nothing.He was in this state for so many years lifting up himalayas under weight of Shiva's toe.Then, under advice of vibishana and maricha, he prays to Lord SHiva to relieve him of the pain ask starts singing hosanas to Shiva.Only, after that the Lord lets him go with his arrogance quelled.Ravana means "one who wailed loudly" in Sanskrit.He got this name only during this incident because he wailed loudly and cried because he could not bear Shiva's toe.Only after this, Shiva granted him a boon of long life and granted some weapons to Ravana.He then proudly boasted his name was "ravana" to everyone after this incodent with Shiva.
So, the first boon was granted to him by Brahma only.

The above story, i read from Harikrishnan sir's chennaionline series.

Hari Krishnan
8th September 2005, 06:44 PM
It must be of interest to know that Valmiki does NOT portray Ravana as a Shiva bhakta. Not a single line exists in the epic to that effect, excepting for the incident of Ravana's lifting of Mount Kailash and getting stuck underneath, when he sings His praise and obtains the boon of protection from various beings, excepting humans and monkeys, and Shiva's sword, Chandrahasa.

As for Kamban, there is only one verse in the entire epic - when Ravana leaves for the last war - which says that he performed Shiva Puja.

On the contrary, there are a number of verses in Kamban, where Ravana speaks lightly of - even scoffs and mocks at - Shiva. I would be happy if someone can come up with textual evidence to the effect that Ravana was a Shiva bhakta.

Hari Krishnan
8th September 2005, 07:04 PM
No No I don'tthink so, viggop anNe, Ravana was Shiva Bahktha , it was Maheshwar who granted the boon, that Ravana was an amarn, and as Ravana's mind was full of ego and greed, he 4got to mention humans in whild he was requesting a boon from Maha Iswar

Ravana was granted longevity and NOT 'amarathvam' or 'chiranjeevithvam.' If one goes to the Uttara Kanda, one can see Ravana performing penance to Brahma, asking for 'amarathvam' and Brahma denying it to him. On the other hand, Vibishana gets it unasked.

Longevity is of course too long a period of time. When Rama shot his final arrow on Ravana, Kamban says it wiped that longevity clean, making all the boons void.

[tscii:e88761d8fd]째 š, ڨ , Ӿ ,
' ¡á ' ,
째 Ģ, ,
¢ ո, ¢, á ɢ šǢ.
[/tscii:e88761d8fd]

'mukkOdi vAz nAL' is a life time of 3,00,00,000 years. But nonetheless limited to that. 'amarathvam' is different. There are only seven 'chiranjeevis' or persons blessed with 'chiranjeevithvam.'
(1) Aswatthama, (2) Maha Bali, (3) Vyasa, (4) Hanuman, (5) Vibishana, (6) Kripacharya, (7) Parasurama.

viggop
8th September 2005, 09:03 PM
I thought that Markendeyan was also a chiranjeevi.

Also, there is supposed to be a sanskrit slokam on Lord Shiva which is supposed to be very powerful.It was created by Ravana.In the north, i think there is a lake near Manasarovar lake known as Ravan's lake.The people there believe that you'll die if you drink water from it as Ravana worshipped Lord Shiva there!

Hari Krishnan
8th September 2005, 09:40 PM
I thought that Markendeyan was also a chiranjeevi.

You are right. On seeing your response, I verified the Abithana Chintamani. It gives two different lists of seven 'chiranjeevis.' Against the definition of the head word 'chiranjeevi,' this encylopaedia of Tamil literature gives the names of the persons that I have quoted above.

However, there is an appendix by name, 'thogai'. This appendix gives details of a group/set which goes by a certain number. That is to say, what are the two eclipses, the three sastras, the three fires, the four upAyas, the five Dhevas, five Dhoopas, etc. There, while defining the Seven Chiranjeevis, the following names are found:

(1) Aswatthama, (2) Maha Bali, (3) Vyasa, (4) Hanuamn, (5) Vibishana, (6) Markandeya, and (7) Parasurama. The name of Kripacharya is absent here.

I do not remember having seen the name of Kripacharya as a Chiranjeevi in Mahabharata. What I quoted above was from memory of an earlier reference to Abitana Chintamani, some time ago. However, my reading of Kisari Mohan Ganguli's translation of Vyasa Bharata is a continuing effort. I may come across a reference to Kripacharya as a Chiranjeevi. If this is found, I will give a reference.


Also, there is supposed to be a sanskrit slokam on Lord Shiva which is supposed to be very powerful.It was created by Ravana.In the north, i think there is a lake near Manasarovar lake known as Ravan's lake.The people there believe that you'll die if you drink water from it as Ravana worshipped Lord Shiva there!

There are two different things. One is based on oral tradition and Sthala Puranas. The other is going strictly by what the Text (of the original author and vazi-nUl-aasiriyar/s) says.

The stories of Rama's worship of Shiva/Shivalinga, at places like Rameshwaram, Kumbakonam etc. are all based on oral tradition and Sthala Puranas, which do have a mark of their own in their respective places. But, these cannot go to assay any particular character. The stories of Ravana's Shiva Bhakti belong to this category. One may say that Ravana was a Shiva Bhakta, according to oral tradition or Sthala Puranas. But this cannot be considered as part of the way in which the character has been constructed by the poets. A serious study cannot admit this, without evidence from the Text.

The one quoted by you falls under this category too. There is no reference anywhere in the epic, either in Valmiki or Kamban to this effect.

This is not to deny the belief/faith in oral tradition. My observations are limited to the main core of the Text and not beyond.

Badri
9th September 2005, 06:32 AM
A) I thought that Markendeyan was also a chiranjeevi.

B) Also, there is supposed to be a sanskrit slokam on Lord Shiva which is supposed to be very powerful.It was created by Ravana.



A) Ashwathama Balirvyaso Hanumanscha Vibheeshanaha Kripaphparsuhramascha Sapthaithey Chiranjeevinaha is a popular shloka, though i am not sure of the source, which talks of Kripa as one of the Chiranjeevis!

B) The Shivatandava Stotram: was composed by Ravana in praise of Shiva. The metre and the syllables give off an impression of Power! Consider the beginning:

Jatatavigalajjala pravahapavitasthale
Galeavalambya lambitam bhujangatungamalikam
Damad damad damaddama ninadavadamarvayam
Chakara chandtandavam tanotu nah shivah shivam .

That it is composed by Ravana is known by the last shloka, which is the phalashruti.

Pujavasanasamaye dashavaktragitam
Yah shambhupujanaparam pathati pradoshhe
Tasya sthiram rathagajendraturangayuktam
Lakshmim sadaiva sumukhim pradadati shambhuh

Dashavaktragitam or the song composed by the 10-headed one!

viggop
9th September 2005, 09:31 AM
Badri
is this slokam present online? I would like to hear the rendition.Supposed to be a very powerful slokam.

There is one more Chiranjeevi who acts in Telugu films and makes crores ;-) .Just a joke.Sorry for digression!

S.Balaji
11th September 2005, 03:24 PM
[tscii:30bea99e9d]Another interesting phase in Ramayana is Parashuramas meeting with Rama Actually Parashurama was another incarnation of Vishu and the previous one of Rama I wonder why he could not recognise his next avatar and almost had head on with Rama.. after Rama was coming from his wedding
Or probably this incident was necessary for Parasurama to hand over the batton to Rama to protect the world
[/tscii:30bea99e9d]

S.Balaji
11th September 2005, 03:28 PM
[tscii:863280db03]Another interesting aspect , in my opinion is the character Valee. If one reads Ramayana without the Valee episode.. still it remains as Ramayana I mean.. .the flow of Ramayana epic will in no way get affected even if Valee had not been there.

The only connection probably could be Rama had to meet Sugriva and seek his support to find Seetha and all other incidents followed ??

Otherwise, I dont find any significant role of Valee having played in the flow of this great epic


[/tscii:863280db03]

viggop
12th September 2005, 09:36 AM
Vali will be born as the hunter in Dwapara yuga and will send the arrow which will kill Lord Krishna.The arror will hit the feet/toe but still Krishna will die.

Hari Krishnan
17th September 2005, 03:35 PM
Vali will be born as the hunter in Dwapara yuga and will send the arrow which will kill Lord Krishna.The arror will hit the feet/toe but still Krishna will die.

Viggop, from where did you pick this up? :-) It would always be a nice idea to give the source along with the posts. That would make the discussions more meaningful. If there is no source, do not fail to mention that this is hearsay.

The name of the hunter who shoots his arrow on the foot of Krishna is Jara. This event is described in Bhagavata. (Book Eleven, Chapter 6). Bhagavata mentions nothing about Jara's previous birth.

viggop
17th September 2005, 03:38 PM
HariKrishnan Sir
I saw that in one of the TV serials(not ramanand sagar's first version).In it,after Rama shoots the arrow at Valee, he'll whisper this in Vali's ear. :oops:

Hari Krishnan
17th September 2005, 04:26 PM
[tscii:c743fee709]Another interesting phase in Ramayana is Parashuramas meeting with Rama Actually Parashurama was another incarnation of Vishu and the previous one of Rama I wonder why he could not recognise his next avatar and almost had head on with Rama.. after Rama was coming from his wedding
Or probably this incident was necessary for Parasurama to hand over the batton to Rama to protect the world
[/tscii:c743fee709]

Parasurama's term on earth extends to the period of Mahabaratha. He is the guru of Bhishma. Parasurama is quite aware of the purpose of this incarnation of Rama and it was his sole purpose to hand over the bow - Narayana dhanus (and not Kodhanda, which is a general name for a bow) - in meeting Rama on his way back from Mithila.

He does not challenge Rama for a one-on-one. He wants to test his prowess with the Narayana Dhanus. That's all.

Two or more Avatars could walk the earth at the same time. What is not possible for the Supreme! One cannot think that the Vaikunda was vacant when Rama was here. He is there; He is here and He is everywhere. :-)

Hari Krishnan
17th September 2005, 04:27 PM
HariKrishnan Sir
I saw that in one of the TV serials(not ramanand sagar's first version).In it,after Rama shoots the arrow at Valee, he'll whisper this in Vali's ear. :oops:

These are oral traditions. Let's respect them. But not to be found in the Texts of the Masters.

Hari Krishnan
17th September 2005, 04:34 PM
[tscii:bebda309e6]Another interesting aspect , in my opinion is the character Valee. If one reads Ramayana without the Valee episode.. still it remains as Ramayana I mean.. .the flow of Ramayana epic will in no way get affected even if Valee had not been there.

The only connection probably could be Rama had to meet Sugriva and seek his support to find Seetha and all other incidents followed ??

Otherwise, I dont find any significant role of Valee having played in the flow of this great epic
[/tscii:bebda309e6]

Yes. You are right. Nothing much would be lost if Vali is eliminated from the story. The Ramayana (and of course the Mahabaratha) was in part, history. I do believe this. Otherwise, it is not possible to bring the play of characters with such perfection, and exactitude. Take a look at the characters, or the geographical marks. Simply stupendous. A person sitting at the other end of this vast continent, giving accurrate geographical details of the country till the tip of it.

Therefore, Valmiki has recorded what has happened. If at all he thought so, he could have easily omitted this portion and brought about this turn of events as a dramatist.

googolplex
17th September 2005, 05:22 PM
"... What a two men show going on here? Where are all the others?
You are simply boring! There is nothing to attract any other hubbers. Why don't you exchange your tel. no. and chat or praise each other from the Dawn to Dusk?..."

From Bad Boy's Great Deutschlandia

S.Balaji
17th September 2005, 05:36 PM
"... What a two men show going on here? Where are all the others?
You are simply boring! There is nothing to attract any other hubbers. Why don't you exchange your tel. no. and chat or praise each other from the Dawn to Dusk?..."

From Bad Boy's Great Deutschlandia

I was under the impression that only during vedic period and in the puranas, Devas and ASURAS existed... Now I realise that I am wrong...

Hari Krishnan
17th September 2005, 05:39 PM
"... What a two men show going on here? Where are all the others?
You are simply boring! There is nothing to attract any other hubbers. Why don't you exchange your tel. no. and chat or praise each other from the Dawn to Dusk?..."

From Bad Boy's Great Deutschlandia

Sorry about it googoplex. I had difficulties in India in accessing Forumhub and could do so only now. I answered all the posts, which I normally do. If the hubbers feel that this is a 'two men show' of which I am a part, bye. If I spend this time somewhere else, I get paid for it. Thanks, anyway.

viggop
17th September 2005, 06:28 PM
Dear HariKrishnan Sir
Please do not go away.I think lot of other people will view these threads.They need not necessarily participate in it.Anyway, lot of young people like me are interested to know more about our religion,holy books and our literature.Please continue your work here.

you have mentioned that Valmiki gave exact description of each place in India.But the time scales for yuga etc. do not match our current scientific facts.So, probably we can say these events happened recently? (say 5000 years ago?)

Hari Krishnan
17th September 2005, 06:38 PM
Dear HariKrishnan Sir
Please do not go away.I think lot of other people will view these threads.They need not necessarily participate in it.Anyway, lot of young people like me are interested to know more about our religion,holy books and our literature.Please continue your work here.

you have mentioned that Valmiki gave exact description of each place in India.But the time scales for yuga etc. do not match our current scientific facts.So, probably we can say these events happened recently? (say 5000 years ago?)

The concept of time has to be understood in the way they stated. What they followed during the time of Mahabaratha was a year with 360 days cyccle. Bhishma refers to this and says, there are in actuality five more days to a year.

Time is a very relative term. This needs to be understood. I have been grappling with the notions in the epic on this asspect. Let me first be clear about what it is,before I can say anything. :-)

In fact Valluvar says

nAl endru ondru pOl kAtti uyir Irum
vAl adhu uNarvArp perin.

Time does not exist in reality. It is only a concept. That's how Parimelazagar interprets it. Space is that which exists between any two objects. Time is the space between any two events, measured in terms of the movement of earth around the sun. Just try to remove your mind beyond the Solar system. And think of a time scale, measure and length, in the absence of sun.

It is a very vast subject. Hope I am blessed with a little understanding, soon.

RR
17th September 2005, 06:46 PM
*** Digression ***

Dear Hari Krishnan & others,

googolplex is our erstwhile Bad Boy reincarnated. In case you don't know him, he is the recipient of 'Most booted-out hubber' award. Here's the nomination he had:


Well, no guesses for who gets booted out the most by the Mods, right????

Just can't figure out you know who sometimes???? What on earth triggers off this kind of animosity, Pa???? Psychotropic drugs, perhaps???

He's like this little rascal of the class, who always wants to keep on needling the teacher in just how far he could goad them, I suppose!! In the end, he gets that proverbial cane, while the rest of us could only watch in sympathy!!!

Pls ignore him.

*** End ***

viggop
17th September 2005, 07:33 PM
Dear HariKrishnan Sir
There is something in physics related to this space-time thing.I read this in Dr.Stephen Hawking's "Brief history of time" book that massive stellar objects like blackholes can bend the space and time because of their gravitational pull.

Hari Krishnan
17th September 2005, 08:03 PM
Brief History of Time is sleeping in my almirah after a first reading, for about ten years now. :-) No time to go through the history of time. :))

viggop
18th September 2005, 06:18 PM
Few songs sung by MS for this Ramanayana thread.Good Music always brings bliss.

Bhavayami Raghuramam by Swathi Thirunal
Lyrics :- http://www.geocities.com/promiserani2/c1001.html
Listen
http://www.musicindiaonline.com/p/x/f4Q2ceO9F9.As1NMvHdW/

Nama Ramayanam by Lakshmanacharyar
http://www.musicindiaonline.com/p/x/tUC9E6tEXS.As1NMvHdW/

Sudhaama
18th September 2005, 10:25 PM
"... What a two men show going on here? Where are all the others?
You are simply boring! There is nothing to attract any other hubbers. Why don't you exchange your tel. no. and chat or praise each other from the Dawn to Dusk?..."

From Bad Boy's Great Deutschlandia

I was under the impression that only during vedic period and in the puranas, Devas and ASURAS existed... Now I realise that I am wrong...

Exactly... And further we have to note our Friend cum Administrator, Mr. RR 's Comments.

Dear Mr HARIKRISHNAN and Others,

Please don't get discouraged or demotivated by such loose comments from some stray elements and jealous persons who do not know how to avail the rare advantage of Fragrance of Applied-Wisdom and Beneficial Knowledge .

I am one of many who enjoy reading the rich postings of Mr. Hari quite interesting,. alongside the matching responses from others

Please continue... in the same Healthy-Spirit on our Heritage.-Treasure.

Sudhaama
20th September 2005, 12:31 AM
Vali will be born as the hunter in Dwapara yuga and will send the arrow which will kill Lord Krishna.The arror will hit the feet/toe but still Krishna will die.

There is no basis for this Story of Rebirth of Vali to kill Krishna by Vengeance.. It cannot be true because....

(1) Vali got Moksha by the grace of Lord Rama... which means NO RE-BIRTH at all, further..

(2) For all the Criticisms, Blames and Questions by Vali to Rama,... he got detailed justifications and due Replies from the Lord... on which he realised his folly and repeanted for his grave misdeeds, especially the worst injustice to his own brother Sugreeva. Then he apologises to the Innocent-victim, his younger Brother. And also hands over his Son Angatha to Sugreeva's care.

Accepting Vali's Apologies and Self-Surrender with a Guilty-conscience, Rama granted Moksha to him out of Mercy..

Then the Question of Vengeance does not arise at all... calling for Rebirth to appease the Vali's alleged Wrath on God. .

Vali's episode ends with Ramayana itself... with NO EXTENSION of term... beyond..

The Hunter "Jara" innocently killed Lord Krishna, similar to Dasaratha's hiiting by an Arrow on Sravana-Kumara... just on the spur of Surmise or Guess.

And further... an interesting point ... Who was Vali?...

...Was he dispensable for Ramayana... as a REDUNDANT-CHARACTER?

No.. Vali was one of the IMPORTANT-CHARACTERS .. INDISPENSABLE for Ramayana.

How ?...I will reply after hearing from others.

Badri
20th September 2005, 06:02 AM
That was the most beautiful insight I have heard on why Vali could not have been Jara, the hunter. Thank you Mr Sudhaama!

Other stories I have heard why he cannot be Jara include the fact that Vali was Indra-amsa while Sugriva was Surya-amsa. As though to make amends for what happened in Ramayana, Krishna was close to Arjuna who was Indra-amsa and not to the Surya-amsa, Karna!

Again, sometimes, all this is forced logic! But Sudhaama's explanation beats everything by its sheer beauty and meaning!

viggop
20th September 2005, 09:55 AM
Thanks Mr.Sudhaama.In Kamba Ramayanam, Vali first accuses Rama for killing him unfairly.Rama then gives a detailed explanation on why he should be punished.I think HariKrishnan Sir has listed 7 reasons in his articles.Vali accepts Rama's reasoning and asks Rama to take care of his son Angada.

i'm not able to find an answer why Vali was indispensable to Ramayana.Meeting Sugriva got Lord Rama, Hanuman and the monkey army.Sugirva gave this support if Lord Rama kills Vali.But, I think the Lord would have killed Ravana without anybody's help too.

Sudhaama Sir
Please do not keep the suspense for a long time. :-)

Sudhaama
24th September 2005, 02:20 AM
VALI the INDISPENSABLE Character of Ramayana.. alongwith Sugreeva and Hanuman.

Thanks to Mr. Badri, Mr. Viggop and others...Mr. Badri has presented his points beautifully...

And... further to my previous statement on the matter... here is my clarification...

(1) The object of Ramawathara was not to make Seetha get caught and then retrieve her BY ANY MEANS... But... "Sishta-Paripalanam - Dhushta-Nigraham" (Protecting the Good alongside Destroying the Evils).

One of such evils to be destroyed was Vali.... and one of the Goods whose interests were to be protected, was Sugreeva (alongwith his Minister Hanuman and others) Sugreeva was the most aggrieved due the Evil-domination by his own brother. Rama's gesture of making friendship with Sugreeva was not in consideration of his comparative-strength vs his enemy Vali's. But to get two Mangoes with One strike.... of Royal- approach... Supporting the Good alongside destroying the Evils.

(2) Vali was the God Indra, while his brother Sugreeva was the God Soorya .. by reincarnation. Since Indra could not bear the extreme onslaughts of atrocities by Ravana on him and the Deva-lokam on the whole, he prayed to God Brahma and got the Awathara as Vali bestowed with unparallel might... to gain half of the magnitude of any of his opponents Fighting-might.

Thus it was contemplated that Ravana the worst Enemy of Indra, can be destroyed, only by means of such a Superlative-supplementation of might, inevitable to combat the Tyrannical Ravana considered invincible till then.

Since Ravana's cruelties extended towards Navagrahas too, the Lord Soorya came forward to support Indra on his Noble-mission.... and so was given awathara as Vali's brother.

If Vali would have sincerely carried out his duties towards the purpose of Reincarnation on Earth...by putting an end to Ravana's evil deeds.. Rama need not have taken awathara at all just for destroying Ravana, but could have restricted with his Sishta-paripalanam only.

(3) Indra in the shape of Vali, not only failed in his Mission-duty and personal commitment, but also caused the situation to aggravate by adding insults to the injury.... since he became Ravana's Friend.

Thus Vali not only added more Gravity to the erstwhile magnitude of the Evils ... but also supplemented his misdeeds by exercising Evils himself by forcible acquiring his brothers wife as well as the rightful share of Kingdom.... that too being the so called God, in another form.

So Rama had to treat Vali as undeserving to stand face to face with Him, thus denying equal status as a Royal-enemy..... and deemed him at par with any Wild-Animal, which is only hunted. ..

In that aspect Ravana was better-qualified to be combated in the Battlefiled ... because he was a Wicked-Ruler who behaved wicked. But he too had some bright sides., even though he was not an Awathara unlike Vali.

Whereas Vali. performed towards the opposite direction, misusing all his mights and rare opportunities provided in his own interests and duties as Indra for Him and Devas sake... But what resulted?...An injustice to His subjects too.

(4) This Reverse-action of Indra in the shape of Vali, also tantamounts to Breach of Trust to Soorya, his Friend...who became the innocent victim of his God-brother's atrocities..

(5) As offered by Vali, if Rama would have sought his support ... no doubt Seetha could have been retrieved, by means of the intervention of Vali. Then the name Ramayana would have been corrected as Valiyayana... and Rama would have been called as the Supporter of Evils...

Gaining Victory with the support of Evils is suicidal. It indirectly means the encouragement of Evils and self-weakening of the Postive-might of Nobles.

(6) If Vali was left apart in Ramayana unaffected by Rama's birth, .. then the Gospel...

Parithraanaaya Saadhoonaam, Vinaasaaya cha Dhushkrithaam
Dharma-Samsthaapanaarthaaya Sambhavaami Yugae Yugae...

... would have become meaningless... and futile.

(7) Irrespective of God's relevance in the epic... it cannot be the Right-objective nor the Healthy- approach of Rama,... to seek the support of Vali, just because of his greater might than Sugreeva, as also his Powerful-Voice with Ravana.

If so resorted, Rama the Embodiment of Noble-Character . would have lost his Golden-image..as also the Glory of this Epic itself would have got decimated. ... because of such a Negative approach... and Sickly Principle

Ramayana conveying a Valuable Human- message, as a Remarkable- Lesson for the posterity, can never set such a bad- precedence ... contrary to the Principles of Righteousness. .

(8) By means of Vali's character... Rama has proved to the Mankind... that...

(a) Alongwith the Personal- Commitments, Duties of the Seat one occupies, are the primary consideration, more than any Individuals- interests ...

(b) If anyone turns as an Evil-force, he is considered as an Opponent to Dharma (Righteousness)...as also the Enemy to Supreme God... the Ultimate-Protector . Nobody including a King or even Gods can be an exception ...

(c) Added to Selfish-motives, if someone becomes wicked too, .he begets the worst punishment...especially when he is meant for implementing the Righteousness. on the field.

Strictly speaking, Vali deserves Naraka, the Hell... But he was so lucky to gain the Merciful Grace of Rama...as to be bestowed Moksha / Mukthi.

(9) In consideration of Ravana's Varam (Boon) .... excluding Monkeys and Mankind ... Sugreeva along with his Monkey-force was needed for Rama... the Human-birth.

Besides there can be no Ramayana without Hanuman... who was so Humble and Dutiful... a Symbolic-character sincerely practicing Dharma

Thus Rama has also proved to humanity that God can take any shape and take the support of anybody and make him / her great... if only Dharma is adhered to.

In brief, the message behind Ramayana, is ... that God works for the Success and Prosperity of Righteous-minded noble persons... more than towards His own Fame.

To accentuate the Values of Daylight ... Dark nights also are needed

To show the Worth of the Shady-shelter... Hot Sun also is needed

To show in practice to Mankind... by translating God's words into action...

... Vali, Sugreeva and Hanuman are also the Indispensable and IMPORTANT Characters of Ramayana.

viggop
24th September 2005, 10:48 AM
Sugreeva seeks protection under Rama.Saranagathi.Lord Rama has to protect him. Just a doubt. If an evil man like Ravana seeks Saranagathi under Rama, then Rama will be forced to protect him.But, can a person still continue to be evil after surrendering himself to the Lord?Or the act of saranagathi means losing individual ego and hence no can be evil after that?

S.Balaji
24th September 2005, 11:03 AM
Sugreeva seeks protection under Rama.Saranagathi.Lord Rama has to protect him. Just a doubt. If an evil man like Ravana seeks Saranagathi under Rama, then Rama will be forced to protect him.But, can a person still continue to be evil after surrendering himself to the Lord?Or the act of saranagathi means losing individual ego and hence no can be evil after that?

Viggop..

Enna marandhuteengalaa..... Endru poi naalai vaa...... Ravana .. during the intial stages of the war itself will have a head on with Rama and will be almost defeated ... and will be armless and tired..... Rama will gracefully tell him to go back and come back fresh the next for the war.......
Can you imagine any other person could have done that.... Only Rama can do such remarkable things .....
If Ravana had sought Saranaagadhi at that time... he would have survived.... but his character was bound for death ... I suppose.... else he would have become a timid character.....

viggop
24th September 2005, 12:22 PM
Hi Balaji
My questions was more towards the meaning of "saranagathi"? Can a person be evil after surrendering himself to God? does "saranagathi" means losing an individual ego?

Hari Krishnan
24th September 2005, 12:35 PM
(1) The object of Ramawathara was not to make Seetha get caught and then retrieve her BY ANY MEANS... But... "Sishta-Paripalanam - Dhushta-Nigraham" (Protecting the Good alongside Destroying the Evils).

One of such evils to be destroyed was Vali.... and one of the Goods whose interests were to be protected, was Sugreeva (alongwith his Minister Hanuman and others) Sugreeva was the most aggrieved due the Evil-domination by his own brother. Rama's gesture of making friendship with Sugreeva was not in consideration of his comparative-strength vs his enemy Vali's. But to get two Mangoes with One strike.... of Royal- approach... Supporting the Good alongside destroying the Evils.

Good observations, Sudhaama. A few points from my side. I will elaborate these later. I have been posponing participaton in the Epics thread because of health reasons. I will give a few quick observations for now.

Rama, if at all his intention was to retrieve Sita, if it was his only consideration, should in all appropiatness have sought the friendship of Vali alone. Vali draws the attention of Rama to this point when he says.

[tscii:f6c674f921]'¨ š â,
¨ Ȣ Ш ɢ,
¨ â 츢,
¨ ¡?[/tscii:f6c674f921]

[tscii:f6c674f921]'¨ [/tscii:f6c674f921] Ravana took Sita away by force. He nullified your acts, your act of protecting her. [tscii:f6c674f921]š â, ¨ Ȣ Ш ɢ,[/tscii:f6c674f921] if you intended to seek the friendship of Sugriva, in order to help you rout him, [tscii:f6c674f921]
¨ â 츢,[/tscii:f6c674f921] then you should have come to me, the lion who is capable of killing an elephant (The word 'puyal' here stands for an elephont) [tscii:f6c674f921] ¨ ¡?[/tscii:f6c674f921] Instead, you have sought the ally of a rabbit. What kind of an effort is this!

Vali was the king. He had all the wherewithal with him to fight the demon. Apart from the infrastural considerations, he had the track record of quelling Ravana. Therefore, he makes an ideal choice, if it was Rama's sole purpose to retrieve Sita from the prison of Ravana.

But it is more than obvious that Rama's intention did not end there. Apart from this, take a look at the advice of Kabandha, at the time of his being killed and appearing in his etheral form, and at the advice of Sabari. Both tell Rama that it is Sugriva with whom he has to join hands to accomplish his purpose. One has to see why both Kabandha and Sabari told Rama to seek the friendship of Sugriva, and make him the king.

You may like to see the following ariticles of mine, in this respect:

Who can be the perfect ally - Part I
http://www.chennaionline.com/festivalsnreligion/religion/religion228.asp

Who can be the perfect ally - Part II
http://www.chennaionline.com/festivalsnreligion/religion/religion229.asp

There are 64 instalments on the Vali Episode, commencing from

The Vali Episode
http://www.chennaionline.com/festivalsnreligion/religion/religion227.asp



(2) Vali was the God Indra, while his brother Sugreeva was the God Soorya .. by reincarnation. Since Indra could not bear the extreme onslaughts of atrocities by Ravana on him and the Deva-lokam on the whole, he prayed to God Brahma and got the Awathara as Vali bestowed with unparallel might... to gain half of the magnitude of any of his opponents Fighting-might.

Vali was the son of Indra. Not Indra himself. Similarly, Sugriva was the son of Sun.

Another thing. That Vali received half-the strength of his opponent is a myth. Though Kamban mentions this aspect, This has to be gone into.

The necklace of Indra, which is supposed to bring half-the strength of his opponent, is handed over to Sugriva at the time of Vali's death. Logically speaking, Sugriva, who now wears the necklace, should have gained that mystic power endowed by the necklace. This did not happen.

This theory is not supported by Valmiki. Kamban's Hanuman says that Vali is capable of getting half the power of his opponent. This has nothing to do with the decision of Rama to kill him from hiding.

I have argued the case in my ChennaiOnline column. This can be found in the above 64 instalments which I have indicated.



Since Ravana's cruelties extended towards Navagrahas too, the Lord Soorya came forward to support Indra on his Noble-mission.... and so was given awathara as Vali's brother.

It is plausible. But not possible. Is there any textual evidence to this effect?


If Vali would have sincerely carried out his duties towards the purpose of Reincarnation on Earth...by putting an end to Ravana's evil deeds.. Rama need not have taken awathara at all just for destroying Ravana, but could have restricted with his Sishta-paripalanam only.

It was beyond Vali. He chose to strike friendship with Ravana instead. Though Vali was powerful enough to meet Ravana, he did not choose to do so.


(3) Indra in the shape of Vali, not only failed in his Mission-duty and personal commitment, but also caused the situation to aggravate by adding insults to the injury.... since he became Ravana's Friend.

True, in part. Once again, Vali was Indra's son. Not Indra himself.


Thus Vali not only added more Gravity to the erstwhile magnitude of the Evils ... but also supplemented his misdeeds by exercising Evils himself by forcible acquiring his brothers wife as well as the rightful share of Kingdom.... that too being the so called God, in another form.

True. This forms the part of the justifications that Rama gives Vali, which Vali gets convinced, and accepts.


So Rama had to treat Vali as undeserving to stand face to face with Him, thus denying equal status as a Royal-enemy..... and deemed him at par with any Wild-Animal, which is only hunted. ..

This question of killing from hiding needs an elaborate answer. I have tried to do so in the above ChennaiOnline articles.


In that aspect Ravana was better-qualified to be combated in the Battlefiled ... because he was a Wicked-Ruler who behaved wicked. But he too had some bright sides., even though he was not an Awathara unlike Vali.

Vali cannot be considered to be an avatar.


Whereas Vali. performed towards the opposite direction, misusing all his mights and rare opportunities provided in his own interests and duties as Indra for Him and Devas sake... But what resulted?...An injustice to His subjects too.

That Vali's subjects were affected is acknowledged by Hanuman. Other points are not supported by Valmiki or Kamban.


(4) This Reverse-action of Indra in the shape of Vali, also tantamounts to Breach of Trust to Soorya, his Friend...who became the innocent victim of his God-brother's atrocities..

This is another hypothesis. This does not figure in, in the Text.


(5) As offered by Vali, if Rama would have sought his support ... no doubt Seetha could have been retrieved, by means of the intervention of Vali. Then the name Ramayana would have been corrected as Valiyayana... and Rama would have been called as the Supporter of Evils...

True. What Rama needed was an ally in his efforts, which extend beyond the retrieval of Sita. It was that he wanted the support from the right person. And not certainly Vali, though Rama considers him as a good king. Not a good person.


(6) If Vali was left apart in Ramayana unaffected by Rama's birth, .. then the Gospel...

Parithraanaaya Saadhoonaam, Vinaasaaya cha Dhushkrithaam
Dharma-Samsthaapanaarthaaya Sambhavaami Yugae Yugae...

... would have become meaningless... and futile.

I need to think over this point.


(7) Irrespective of God's relevance in the epic... it cannot be the Right-objective nor the Healthy- approach of Rama,... to seek the support of Vali, just because of his greater might than Sugreeva, as also his Powerful-Voice with Ravana.

This has already been acknowledged.


If so resorted, Rama the Embodiment of Noble-Character . would have lost his Golden-image..as also the Glory of this Epic itself would have got decimated. ... because of such a Negative approach... and Sickly Principle.

I agree. But it is not right to say that Rama would have lost his 'golden-image', as that would show Rama more as an image-conscious person, rather than a Dharma-conscious person.

As for the other points, I will join a little later. Running a temperature. Unable to sit, read or type any more.

viggop
24th September 2005, 01:21 PM
Dear HariKrishnan Sir
Take rest.Eagerly awaiting your update in MahaBharatha thread on duryodhana's ascent to heaven once you come back.

S.Balaji
24th September 2005, 05:25 PM
[tscii:7d6f4f36c8]I wonder why Sugriva did not use Hanuman to fight Valee. After all Hanuman is all powerful and mighty ..
Besides, Hanuman is not an ordinary person to run away and go along with Sugriva. To be away from the crutches of Valeethough he played a supportive role to Sugriva

Any reason for this .
[/tscii:7d6f4f36c8]

viggop
24th September 2005, 07:09 PM
Hi Balaji
Hanuman does not know about his strength at that time when he is running all around the world with Sugriva to escape from Vali.It is due to some curse.Hanuman will come to know about his strength through Jambavan before he jumps to cross the coean.If he had known his strength previously, he would have fought with Vali.SO, Hanuman does not know he is a very strong person with lot of powers till Jambavan reminds him about it and dispels the curse. They hide in the mountains because Vali cannot come to that mountain.
Vali will kill a demon and will fling the bones.This will fall on a rishi's hut and rishi will curse that the person who did that will have his head blown if he comes to the place.that is why sugriva will hide in that mountain as Vali cannot come there

Hari Krishnan
24th September 2005, 07:53 PM
[tscii:8ed0a5a8f8]I wonder why Sugriva did not use Hanuman to fight Valee. After all Hanuman is all powerful and mighty ..
Besides, Hanuman is not an ordinary person to run away and go along with Sugriva. To be away from the crutches of Valeethough he played a supportive role to Sugriva

Any reason for this .
[/tscii:8ed0a5a8f8]

This very same question is raised by Rama, in the Uttara Kanda, to sage Agastya, who is narrating the events of earlier days. You may see the reason here:

http://www.harimozhi.com/Article.asp?id=47

S.Balaji
25th September 2005, 11:39 PM
[tscii:ec3e37fd12]Dear Mr. Hari Krishnan,

Thank you very much for the link. Another interesting feature has been the presence of Sage Agastiyar I presume he must be the same Agastiyar to whom Lord Shiva told him to move down to South of Podhigai to maintain the balance of the earth as the entire world was moving to North to attend Lord Shivas Wedding to Parvathi Devi. Is Agastiyar an another personality who lived long . And he had also wrote a lot about Lord Muruga. . There is also another saying that Agastiyar only brought Tamil .
There is another episode which I saw in the movie Agastiyar Playing veena with Ravana and winning the duel. Did it happen actually ?

Agastiyar will also caution Sri Rama while they were in forest to take care of Sita ( before the Ravana episode ) .. I had read this in Chakaravarthy Thirumagan of Rajaji
[/tscii:ec3e37fd12]

viggop
26th September 2005, 03:13 PM
Agastiya tells the slokam "Aditya Hrudayam" to Lord Rama to make him courageous before the battle.he is one of the saptha rishis.

Sudhaama
26th September 2005, 11:48 PM
Glad to note that Mr.Hari-Krishnan has been well- crowned as PRO- HUBBER...

Thus my recommendation and requests have been duly considered. Thanks to the Administrators.. In my opinion Mr. Hari-krishnan deserves more.

On my postings regarding Vali... Mr Hari has commented analytically ... by which he has decorated and bejewelled the Topic indepth.... kindling my thoughts deeply.

I am waiting for others to comment on these differeing views.... after hearing which I want to put forth, my further comments relevant to Mr. Hari's Thought-provoking points.

Especially Mr. Badri, who has already put forth his own views prior to Mr. Hari,... anything got to say now?

pamrang
27th September 2005, 09:28 AM
Sorry to interrupt on the interesting discussion; I heard someone say today that according to the telugu version of Ramayana, Sita is elder to Rama (by 4 yrs).
Is that true and does Valmiki Ramayana concur with this?

S.Balaji
27th September 2005, 11:50 AM
Agastiya tells the slokam "Aditya Hrudayam" to Lord Rama to make him courageous before the battle.he is one of the saptha rishis.

Since Viggop mentioned about Aditya Hrudhayam, I thought it will be appropriate to put this thread below :

http://www.saigan.com/heritage/gods/art1.html

Raghu
3rd October 2005, 09:27 PM
Hi Balaji
Hanuman does not know about his strength at that time when he is running all around the world with Sugriva to escape from Vali.It is due to some curse.Hanuman will come to know about his strength through Jambavan before he jumps to cross the coean.If he had known his strength previously, he would have fought with Vali.SO, Hanuman does not know he is a very strong person with lot of powers till Jambavan reminds him about it and dispels the curse. They hide in the mountains because Vali cannot come to that mountain.



yes this happens in Ramaeshwaram coast, this is where Jambavan reveals the truth to hanuman ji

happyindian
5th October 2005, 06:08 PM
Dear Hari Krishnan Sir,

When (which period) exactly did Agastya live (in)? If he lived at the same time as Rama, when did Ramayana take place?

Cud you let us know more about Agastya, from not only the Ramayana, but from other sources you may know of.

Thanks much.

viggop
10th October 2005, 12:24 PM
agasthiyar is one of the saptharishis.very important sage in hindu pantheon.i think it is agasthiyar who finally reveals to Rama that he is an avatar of Vishnu.

i am reading a trAnslation of valmiki ramayanam.in that,it is mentioned that indrajith sends forth a naga asthram which ties both rama and lakshmana and both lose conciousness.later,rama recovers.Then,Garuda appears and all the snakes slither away.
did neither rama nor lakshmana have a counter weapon for this naga asthra used by indrajith.

sivajayan
14th October 2005, 04:57 PM
Can anyone explain the meaning of the Names occuring in the epics Ramayana and Mahabaratha?

Perhaps create a new thread like Ramayana for Foreigners or similar. Will help me and my european friends to understand the Indian Culture and society better.

Thanks

viggop
25th October 2005, 09:51 AM
sivajayan
If you browse this full thread, i wud have mentioned the meaning of the name Rama.

Raghu
26th October 2005, 11:03 PM
Ravaana was a great devotee of Lord Shiva, and Shiva had blessed him that he could not be destroyed. Lord Ram knew of this, and he knew that the only solution was to pray to Lord Shiv to rescind that boon given to Ravaana so that Lord Ram could kill Ravaana. (This is from the Ramayana)

Raghu
26th October 2005, 11:11 PM
[tscii:8ee2732aaa]The story of GUHA, ruler of the small Kingdom of Shrang-veh-pur. Guha was the devoted friend of Bhagvan Sri Ram. But how did he become a friend of Sri Ram? In his previous life, he was an aborignal hunter named GURUDRO. One day he was tracking a deer, but the deer was too swift for him. He kept following the deer (peche peche) but he could not get off an arrow. Soon he was tired and climbed up into a tree to see if he could spot the animal. As he looked all around, he began absent-mindedly to pluck the leaves from the tree and throw them unto the ground. Unknowing to him, he was sitting on a sacred Bilva tree (bay leaves) and again unknowing to him, the leaves were falling unto a natural Shivlingam which was hidden just below the surface of the earth. As the leaves kept falling unto the Shivling, the positive energy of Lord Shiva began to influence Gurudros mind. When the deer appeared close by, he found that he did not want to kill it. He began to struggle with his conscience. He was torn with the thoughts of killing an innocent animal and his duty to feed his hungry family. Soon his attention fell on the spot where the Shivling rested. He descended from the tree, cleared the earth from around the Shivling and began to cry and pray aloud as he kneeled and hugged the Shivling. Mera Kalyan karo Bhagvan, he repeated over and over. Lord Shiva appeared before him in the form of a Yogi. He said, Utto (get up) Grurdro. It is a sin to kill. But it is also a sin not to do your duty. Today is Shivaraarti, and because of your worship, your prayer is answered. Your past sins are forgiven. From here on, you will live as the King of Shrang-veh-pur. In Treta Yuga, Sri Vishnu will incarnate on earth as Sri Ram. You will be his friend. And so in the Ramayana, when Sri Ram went to Gurukula (Ashram school), he befriended Guha who was at the same school. Later when Sri Ram went to Banbaas, he had to pass through Shrang-veh-pur and again met Guha, his lifelong friend.
[/tscii:8ee2732aaa]

viggop
27th October 2005, 10:35 AM
Ravana was not a great devotee of Shiva from the beginning.As i mentioned in the story before, he even opposed HIM and shook the himalayas.After Shiva quelled his arrogance with his toe,only then he became devotee of Shiva and got a life for 3 crore years.Also, lot of times, he abused the trinity.Only before the final battle with Rama, he prayed again to Lord Shiva.

viggop
27th October 2005, 10:36 AM
I dont think Rama befriended Guha in his gurukul days.I think he first met Guha in the forest only.

viggop
2nd November 2005, 09:53 AM
How does Hanuman become a chiranjeevi? Was it given to him in his birth or he earned it like Vibishana?

Badri
2nd November 2005, 10:17 AM
I think Sita blesses him to be a Chiranjeevi

After the war, and after Sita is rescued and is united with Rama, she blesses him to be a Chiranjeevi

S.Balaji
2nd November 2005, 05:10 PM
I think Sita blesses him to be a Chiranjeevi

After the war, and after Sita is rescued and is united with Rama, she blesses him to be a Chiranjeevi

I think Hanumanji got this boon from Lord Brahma when he was a kid while trying to grap Suryan ...thinking that it is a red ball .....

Indira will hit him with Vajrayudham and Hanuman will fall unconscious ...As he is the son of Vayu.... Vayu will get upset with this and will stop his activity ..... the whole world will suffer and will plead to Vayu and Brahma ...finally vayu will accede to the request of the devas and will resume his duty..
Brahma will give Hanuman a boon at this time that he will be a Chiranjeevi.....and even Bramastra will not affect him...

Raghu
2nd November 2005, 07:41 PM
I think Sita blesses him to be a Chiranjeevi

After the war, and after Sita is rescued and is united with Rama, she blesses him to be a Chiranjeevi

I think Hanumanji got this boon from Lord Brahma when he was a kid while trying to grap Suryan ...thinking that it is a red ball .....

Indira will hit him with Vajrayudham and Hanuman will fall unconscious ...As he is the son of Vayu.... Vayu will get upset with this and will stop his activity ..... the whole world will suffer and will plead to Vayu and Brahma ...finally vayu will accede to the request of the devas and will resume his duty..
Brahma will give Hanuman a boon at this time that he will be a Chiranjeevi.....and even Bramastra will not affect him...


as far as I know this is correct

Sudhaama
2nd November 2005, 07:43 PM
I think Sita blesses him to be a Chiranjeevi

After the war, and after Sita is rescued and is united with Rama, she blesses him to be a Chiranjeevi

I think Hanumanji got this boon from Lord Brahma when he was a kid while trying to grap Suryan ...thinking that it is a red ball .....

Indira will hit him with Vajrayudham and Hanuman will fall unconscious ...As he is the son of Vayu.... Vayu will get upset with this and will stop his activity ..... the whole world will suffer and will plead to Vayu and Brahma ...finally vayu will accede to the request of the devas and will resume his duty..
Brahma will give Hanuman a boon at this time that he will be a Chiranjeevi.....and even Bramastra will not affect him...

Yes... I agree it is CORRECT... as Mr. Balaji says. That Boon was granted to the Boy Hanuman... by Brahma.

May I know... What is meant by... Will.... Will... Will.?... Tamilised- English.?

viggop
5th November 2005, 11:51 AM
Is the story of Hanuman's childhood days told in the Ramayana?Or is it said in some other purana?

viggop
5th November 2005, 12:05 PM
People who know to read Thamizh can go here and read about Hanuman.This is available in book form too.

http://www.harimozhi.com/article.asp?id=42

sivajayan
5th November 2005, 04:23 PM
May I know... What is meant by... Will.... Will... Will.?... Tamilised- English.?

May I know... What is meant by... dot.... dot... dot.?... Dotolised-English.? :lol:

Let me please know why you perforate your contributions though I am less interested?

Sudhaama
5th November 2005, 07:07 PM
May I know... What is meant by... Will.... Will... Will.?... Tamilised- English.?

May I know... What is meant by... dot.... dot... dot.?... Dotolised-English.? :lol:

Let me please know why you perforate your contributions though I am less interested?

Ha Ha Ha.. Well. I enjoyed reading this Joke....

Regarding my unusual way of presentation... with Splits and Dots ... in between the same sentence..

I am a Writer not ony here but also elsewhere too. My Articles and other matters have been published in Magazines. I write Books too.

And this way of writing is my own style of writing... as every writer has got something different and unique style (Baani) of ones own, by way of expressions, approach as also in splitting and aligning the words and lines...

... on which every Writer is allowed freedom... unquestioned .. as a matter of convention.

Well. Why should I present so?.. What way it is preferred according to my perception?

I am a sincere student and ardent follower of the writing-styles of the famous Writers like... Kalki, Kannadasan, CNAnnadurai, Wodehouse and such others.... and further I have pruned a little further, suiting to the contemporary days.

In brief, this is a DRAMATIC INTONATION ... or CONVERSATIONAL STYLE ... of breaking the sentence with pauses and stops in the midst.. to highlight the particular cluster of words with more emphasis on its sense..

To ascertain this fact further... you can try practically. Please write the same sentences, in the regular Text-book order and read first...

.. and then you read in my way. You can feel the difference of the deep impression each batch of words delivers its impact... coupled with its implied sense.

Some people may not agree with me nor appreciate... and may even pooh pooh my concept. ... Yes. Because,... Taste differs

Well It is my way.. which has been appreciated by many many. Readers as well as different Magazine- Editors.

I know... You will enjoy making fun of this message.... by ridicule and mock at me... as well as gain sadistic pleasure to INSULT ME EVEN... as you are habitually doing so far... Well it is your way of approach on life... Yes Enjoy... I will continue to tolerate such UNDUE PERSONAL INJURIES.. Because in the major part of my Life I have extremely and unduly suffered and so used to it..

However... I have replied in the interest of my well-wisher Readers and Fans... who may be curious to know the reason behind this unusual phenomena here.

sivajayan
6th November 2005, 04:47 PM
May I know... What is meant by... Will.... Will... Will.?... Tamilised- English.?

May I know... What is meant by... dot.... dot... dot.?... Dotolised-English.? :lol:

Let me please know why you perforate your contributions though I am less interested?

Ha Ha Ha.. Well. I enjoyed reading this Joke....
Great, Thaaththaa



Some people may not agree with me nor appreciate... and may even pooh pooh my concept. ... Yes. Because,... Taste differs
Do they really.. even pooh pooh...? :lol: Must be ... bad people .... these people .... or are they simply normal ... perhaps even not reading books ... in different libraries .... Gaining knowledge of yester years ... and the views of prehistoric stone agers...



Well It is my way.. which has been appreciated by many many. Readers as well as different Magazine- Editors.

I know... You will enjoy making fun of this message.... by ridicule and mock at me... as well as gain sadistic pleasure to INSULT ME EVEN... as you are habitually doing so far... Well it is your way of approach on life... Yes Enjoy... I will continue to tolerate such UNDUE PERSONAL INJURIES.. Because in the major part of my Life I have extremely and unduly suffered and so used to it..

However... I have replied in the interest of my well-wisher Readers and Fans... who may be curious to know the reason behind this unusual phenomena here.

And this is my way ... appreciated by all... except you ... and not tolerated by Moderators ... but not all ... :lol:

But the silly thing is that you take it as personal as you can. Why can't you take it as my way? May be ... you must first read some of my unwritten books... and understand before you read. :lol:

Sudhaama
6th November 2005, 07:16 PM
Dear Mr. Sivajayan,

We both are taking this Thread towards a different direction far away from the Scope of this Thread... and thus TRANSGESSING our bounds...

So Let us Stop further discussions of PERSONAL CLASH.. anymore here in this Thread ... as Digression.

Well... I will reply you... soon in another relevant Thread.

With Best Wishes,
Sudhaama.

mahadevan
6th November 2005, 11:57 PM
Sita's statement in ramayana

You, Rama, rejected me because you fear that my body was defiled by his touch, though you know my heart was pure. This anti-god (Ravana) wanted my heart, even though he knew my body was taken by you. Some day, intelligent people will know who was a nobler lover

viggop
7th November 2005, 09:15 AM
Ravana wanting Sita's heart is not true.He wanted Sita to bow to him and comply.He could not accept the rejection of his love by a woman.He, the emperor of all 3 worlds, the most powerful demon who could have all things he wanted, could not stand rejection.His ego did not allow it.He wanted Sita to bow to him only to satisfy his ego.If she had bowed to him even once and complied, he wud have kept her in his harem like lot of other women whom he abducted.he could not take Sita by force because of the curse that his head will break into thousand pieces.

Ravana was a habitual sex offender and had no respect for the womenkind.Harikirshnan Sir has dealt with this aspect beautifully in his chennaionline series.

sivajayan
7th November 2005, 04:07 PM
Dear Mr. Sivajayan,

We both are taking this Thread towards a different direction far away from the Scope of this Thread... and thus TRANSGESSING our bounds...

So Let us Stop further discussions of PERSONAL CLASH.. anymore here in this Thread ... as Digression.

Well... I will reply you... soon in another relevant Thread.

With Best Wishes,
Sudhaama.

It was you misusing this thread .. not only this one ... for personal sales promotion ... if I may oppose you as usual .... with deepest respect.... Sir!
I am eagerly waiting ... for your reply... "soon in another relevant Thread"... but Sire... please don't cry for the nanny thereafter, please. :lol:

Can anyone tell me why this story - ramayana - reminds me of a greek mythology? Is there anybody aware of greek mythologies? :roll:

mahadevan
7th November 2005, 08:21 PM
Hi viggop, your point makes logical sense for the story, it could be true that Ravana was not wanting her heart, but just her subjugation. The boon thing adds the logic for it.

But was Rama correct in suspecting sita ?, that too by making her walk on fire. Does this not manifest complete male chuvaninsm, treating women just as a sex object, that too an object with chastity. Was he not broad minded enough to accept Sita even if she was helplessly raped by ravana. What is the message that Ramayana conveys in its climax ?

Raghu
7th November 2005, 08:31 PM
Hi viggop, your point makes logical sense for the story, it could be true that Ravana was not wanting her heart, but just her subjugation. The boon thing adds the logic for it.

But was Rama correct in suspecting sita ?, that too by making her walk on fire. Does this not manifest complete male chuvaninsm, treating women just as a sex object, that too an object with chastity. Was he not broad minded enough to accept Sita even if she was helplessly raped by ravana. What is the message that Ramayana conveys in its climax ?

Dear Mahadev,

This aspect was discussed long back, Shree RamaChandar asks Devi Sita to cross the fire to prove her purity to the citizens of Ayodiya, Shree RamaChandar NEVER EVER doubted his wife, this issue has been WIDELY misused or misinterpreted by most ppl

:cry: :cry:

viggop
7th November 2005, 08:55 PM
Mahadevan
I think Sudhamma has tounched on this point in this thread.Please see the archives of this thread.

mahadevan
7th November 2005, 10:13 PM
Shree RamaChandar asks Devi Sita to cross the fire to prove her purity to the citizens of Ayodiya

was Rama supportive of the view that Sita needs to be sexually pure ? personally was he convinced or not about Sita's chastity is immaterial.
Why should he prove to the people of Ayodiya that Sita was pure, is it just because he personally felt the same or was he just perpetuating (instead of opposing) male chuvanism that was existing among the people of Ayodiya.

If Rama was a noble soul, then he should told the people that even if Ravana had forefully raped Sita, Sita should not be blamed for this, and such acts should never be equated to defiling of a women's chastity, as she did not do so by her own will.

viggop
8th November 2005, 09:11 AM
I had asked a question previously.
Is the story regarding birth of Hanuman and his childhood days part of ramayana? or is it bhagwatha purana?

sivajayan
8th November 2005, 03:55 PM
Dear Mahadev,

This aspect was discussed long back, Shree RamaChandar asks Devi Sita to cross the fire to prove her purity to the citizens of Ayodiya, Shree RamaChandar NEVER EVER doubted his wife, this issue has been WIDELY misused or misinterpreted by most ppl

:cry: :cry:

Now, with today's knowledge you talk so! I don't have to own the imaginative power to see how it was yesterday!
I am quite sure that ramayana only discribes the culture and civilisation of that period it was written like a lot of other stuff in the greek or roman mythologies do.

It is told a blind is a visionary among ...

viggop
9th November 2005, 04:29 PM
The nine moods of Sri Rama has been described in a Sanskrit shloka. The following is the shloka on 'Navarasa Rama':
Shrngaaram kshithinandhini viharane, Veeram dhanurbhanjane
haasyam shoorpanamukhe, Bhayam aghe, Bheebatsam anyamukhe, Kaarunyam balibhojane, Adbhutharasam sindhau giri sthapane, Raudhro raavana mardhane, Munijane shaantham
vapuh paathunah

Translation:
Love while sporting with the daughter of Goddess earth, heroism while breaking the bow, humour on seeing the face of Shoorpanaka, fear of sins, disgust for another lady's face, compassion in the kakasura episode, wonder while placing the mountain on the ocean, anger while killing Raavana, tranquility towards sages.

pamrang
10th November 2005, 05:28 AM
The agni pravesa episode too has been very extensively dealt with by Mr. Harikrishnan in his chennaionline series. I quote here some statements to make the point that Rama's behavior in this chapter, although not throughly convincing by today's standards, can still be justified.
Rama never doubted Sita - this is apparent from many subtle points, which I cannot do justice to if I go into it and so, I will just quote a couple.
Rama asked that Sita be decorated like a queen when she is brought to meet him after the war; he sends her this message with Vibhishana. He specifically asks her to dress herself up only because he knows that she would not already be so. If she had acceded to Ravana's wishes, one may take for granted that she would not anymore be wearing her old rags.
Also, after she is brought to his presence, when he addresses her, he says "the sight of your person hurts me like light hurting a diseased eye". It is quite apparent from this statement what he thought of her and also what he thought of himself for choosing to do this to her.
As to whether it was really necessary to prove her chastity to the people of ayodhya, this is how I see it - He was a king; he had already accepted the throne when Bharata visited him in the forest. He could have very well said that he trusted Sita and that should be good enough for everyone. If he had said that, I am sure, nobody would have dared to question him. But, he did not choose to be such domineering king whose word should be the law. By disowning Sita in public, he set the standard that the king is a servant of the people and that he ( in this case, the king and queen) should have standards higher than average that the public should be inspired to emulate.
I would very much have loved it if Rama had said either that he knew Sita was pure or that she being the helpless victim of rape does not taint her in anyway. But, I think, Valmiki chose to place the burden of ungentlemanly behavior on Rama to exemplify the exceptional chastity of Sita. Had Rama not acted that way, Sita would not have had such shining glory. I think, this brings out Rama's nobility more than if he had accepted her without question.

viggop
10th November 2005, 08:57 AM
[tscii:43d0333b68]From Sudhaama's Post
=======================

(1) Seshathwam ( SEVAKAM in Tamil) =

Direct Service to God / King / Leader...
(SEVAKAMUM yaam paadi Varuththamum theerndhu - Thiruppaavai)

(2) Paarathanthriyam (PARHAI in Tamil =

Indirect Service by Carrying out the Orders of God / King / Leader
(Yitrai-p-PARHAI kolhvaan anrhu kaanh Govindha - Thiruppaavai)

Out of all others in Ramayana duly recognised by Rama for their worthy services and so invited to accompany Him to Vaikunta...

.. Only Hanumaan refused to accompany ..

.. while all others gladly accepted Ramas offer,

.. after that Awathaara was completed and so Hanukman was left behind on Earth.

Hanuman sought to continue on Earth, because he had already tasted the pleasure of SESHATHWAM (Sevakam)

.. but yet wanted to have the pleasure of PAARATHANTHRIYAM (Parhai) also more...

.. which is preferred by his Lord Rama / Narayana .. from any of His devotees ..

.. better than the SEVAKAM (Direct service to Himself.). [/tscii:43d0333b68]

mahadevan
16th November 2005, 01:36 AM
"Rama asked that Sita be decorated like a queen when she is brought to meet him after the war; he sends her this message with Vibhishana. He specifically asks her to dress herself up only because he knows that she would not already be so. If she had acceded to Ravana's wishes, one may take for granted that she would not anymore be wearing her old rags."

If Sita had conceeded she would have been added to the list of Ravana's concubines, and not his queen. So the statement of Ram can be construed to be 'Rama not wanting to see sita dressed as a concubine, rather than he not wanting to see her in rags'.


"Also, after she is brought to his presence, when he addresses her, he says "the sight of your person hurts me like light hurting a diseased eye". It is quite apparent from this statement what he thought of her and also what he thought of himself for choosing to do this to her."

This is simply a very normanl human statement, when a person is imprisoned for such a long time, she would look miserably and when her hubby gets to see her in that state, such a statement looks very ordinary, definetly not noble. A noble statement would have been something that addressed her inner beauty/commitment/resolve, apparently Rama was very ordinary that scene.


"But, he did not choose to be such domineering king whose word should be the law. By disowning Sita in public, he set the standard that the king is a servant of the people and that he ( in this case, the king and queen) should have standards higher than average that the public should be inspired to emulate."

Instead of telling the correct thing vehemently he preferred to tell the wrong male chuvanistic ideas just to appease the masses, so that they thing he is not domineering ? hey his politics shames that of Amma/MK.


"Had Rama not acted that way, Sita would not have had such shining glory. I think, this brings out Rama's nobility more than if he had accepted her without question"

That was a shamefull statement, it accepts sita jumping in the pyre to prove her greatness, and Rama became more noble because of that !!!!! , is Kovalan equally noble because of the same reason ?

bis_mala
25th November 2005, 11:41 AM
// hey his politics shames that of Amma/MK.//

Why refer to Amma/MK?

viggop
25th November 2005, 05:47 PM
[tscii:f63e0fcf13]Rama is the one who is Eka patni vrathan; who cries when the spouse was abducted; who was loving and caring for SitA.

Rama never ever wished to kill the enemies. From the very first thaatakai, he hesitated to kill her as she was a woman; He let Maareecha go away; while he killed subaahu; He even wished to forgive Ravana and gave ample chances for him to surrender.

kaRpaar raamapiraanai allaal maRRum kaRparO?- asks NammAzhwAr.. why would anyone learn anything but Rama?

This also echoes AndALs calling Rama as mantthukkuinyaan.

Sri Kodai Nachiar pays a rare tribute to Sri Rama in Sri Tiruppavai- She calls Him Manatthukku iniyAn, a sobriquet She doesnt use with regard to any other avatArA, though several have been alluded to in Tiruppavai.

it must have been a question of Honesty. An honest person endears himself to us much more than one who is not.

When we think of Sri Rama, what comes to our mind immediately is the upright figure, who would rather give His life, than speak untruth.

RamO dvir nAbhi bhAshatE says Sri Valmiki, confirming the Princes penchant for adhering to His word, irrespective of the travails they may land Him in. Further, as He himself confirms, anritam na uktapoorvam mE na cha vakshyE kadAchana(I have never told an untruth in the past, nor shall I ever do so).[/tscii:f63e0fcf13]

rsankar
22nd December 2005, 01:49 AM
Can anyone tell me where I get, "Seetha Rama patabhishegha sthothiram"...(in tamil)

Web address?

Regards
rsankar.

Sudhaama
25th December 2005, 08:32 PM
[tscii:1c8c95ac0d]Rama is the one who is Eka patni vrathan; who cries when the spouse was abducted; who was loving and caring for SitA.

Rama never ever wished to kill the enemies. From the very first thaatakai, he hesitated to kill her as she was a woman; He let Maareecha go away; while he killed subaahu; He even wished to forgive Ravana and gave ample chances for him to surrender.

kaRpaar raamapiraanai allaal maRRum kaRparO?- asks NammAzhwAr.. why would anyone learn anything but Rama?

This also echoes AndALs calling Rama as mantthukkuinyaan.

Sri Kodai Nachiar pays a rare tribute to Sri Rama in Sri Tiruppavai- She calls Him Manatthukku iniyAn, a sobriquet She doesnt use with regard to any other avatArA, though several have been alluded to in Tiruppavai.

it must have been a question of Honesty. An honest person endears himself to us much more than one who is not.

When we think of Sri Rama, what comes to our mind immediately is the upright figure, who would rather give His life, than speak untruth.

RamO dvir nAbhi bhAshatE says Sri Valmiki, confirming the Princes penchant for adhering to His word, irrespective of the travails they may land Him in. Further, as He himself confirms, anritam na uktapoorvam mE na cha vakshyE kadAchana(I have never told an untruth in the past, nor shall I ever do so).[/tscii:1c8c95ac0d]

Ah! Beautiful ... Splendid presentation... Hats off to my dear Friend Mr viggop. My comments on your remarks...

"Manaththukkiniyaan"

Andal Kodhai, attributes so... not out of her own... but as the TAMIL-WORD...TRANSLATION coined for the word Rama.

"Karpaar Ramapiraanai allaal matrum karparoa? -THIRUVAAYMOZHI"

These words of Nammaalwaar mean... the Greatness of Rama as an Ideal-man... exhibiting the basic strengths and weaknesses innate for the Mankind, like Enrage, Grief, Desire etc....

...and under the grip of such emotions how any man is prone to react...

... and what will be the outcome of the Positive and Negative spirits in the course of Human-life...

...far different and unique, discernible from all other Creatures ... inferior to Man.

Rather Rama is the only Awathara, where He has shown to the posterity, both the sides of Life... as an Exemplary and Emulative Model-man... even by self-indictment of UNDUE sufferings...

... just to establish the Greatness as well as the Topmost principles one shoud adhere to in Life...

...which are... RIGHTEOUSNESS, VICTORY for TRUTH, and JUSTICE to all, even to the Oppressed or Dominated VICTIM..by any means of exploitation from the Wickeds.

Hence Rama is named as SATHYA-VRATHA, SATHYA-NARAYANA, SATHYA-KAAMA, SATHYA-SANKALPA....

To sum up... the Lesson meant here... is.. SATHYAM AEVA JAYATHAE.

To mean... JUSTICE BY TRUTH ONLY WINS

..Mankind should sincerely adhere to RIGHTEOUSNESS ONLY....

In extreme cases God will personally interfere to set right

viggop
26th December 2005, 08:56 AM
Dear Sudhaama Sir
As usual, i just copied and pasted that snippet here and it was not my own writing. :-)
Thanks for your explanation on it

siva
6th February 2006, 02:48 AM
Dear Raghu,

Yes. Ravana had many noble qualities. As a king he ruled well over his subjects. His musical talent (at par with Naradha) could have only stemmed out of a well cultivated mind. Even when he brought Sita to his town he did maintain his distance- forget the curse. He listened to Vibhishana's advice that envoys should not be killed- and let Hanuman go free. He let Vibhishana to cross over to Rama's side. In the battlefield he did not surrender.

But he dedired many women who did not rightly belong to him. Also He treated the Devas harshly disgracing them to perform menial tasks. He encouraged his raksashas to disturb the yagams(rituals) performed by the rishis.


So he had a long and victorious life till his merits and boons protected him. At the end he had to be punished for his evil doings.


Please give your comments on this. I also ask any other interested person to join in and continue this topic further.

Regards,

Siva

goodsense
6th February 2006, 03:12 AM
***Even when he brought Sita to his town he did maintain his distance*** ????

What about the undoing of her saree and Hanumanji got there just on time?

Raghu
6th February 2006, 08:16 PM
Dear Raghu,

Yes. Ravana had many noble qualities. As a king he ruled well over his subjects. His musical talent (at par with Naradha) could have only stemmed out of a well cultivated mind. Even when he brought Sita to his town he did maintain his distance- forget the curse. He listened to Vibhishana's advice that envoys should not be killed- and let Hanuman go free. He let Vibhishana to cross over to Rama's side. In the battlefield he did not surrender.

But he dedired many women who did not rightly belong to him. Also He treated the Devas harshly disgracing them to perform menial tasks. He encouraged his raksashas to disturb the yagams(rituals) performed by the rishis.


So he had a long and victorious life till his merits and boons protected him. At the end he had to be punished for his evil doings.


Please give your comments on this. I also ask any other interested person to join in and continue this topic further.

Regards,

Siva

Dear Siva,

I fully agree with your points about Ravana, but many here have failed to address he was big Maheshwar Bhaktha, to be continued...

viggop
7th February 2006, 07:58 PM
Dear Raghu
I think i have mentioned this before.He was not a great bhaktha of Shiva.He abused the trinity many times due to his arrogance.He sang devotional songs on Shiva only after his arrogance was crushed by shiva's toe.Before that, he asked "Who is Shankara?" to Nandi when Nandi asked him to take another route.
Even after this, after getting boons from Shiva , he abused Shiva,Vishnu,Brahma many times.Only before the last battle in which he died , he again performed the Shiva pooja.but of course, Kamban writes that the arrows Of Rama wiped out all the boons in one stroke. :-)

Raghu
7th February 2006, 08:41 PM
Dear Viggop,

I have heard some where Ravan played the veena to please Maheshwar, as he made Ishwar angry for some reason.

I think the moral values behind this is that, no matter how ever much u devotee towards Isa(IShwar) as u posses bad qualities within you and u indulge ur self in Maya , ur atma will never attain Moksha or be a noble atma (punitha atma) am I right?

santosh108
17th March 2006, 07:34 PM
The beauty of the Thai Ramakien (Ramayana)
____________________________

Written some 2,000 years ago and accredited to the Indian poet Valmiki, the Ramayana opens with the founding of the rival cities of Ayutthaya, capital of the gods, and Langka, city of the demons. The long and convoluted tale revolves around the struggle between these two antagonistic forces, the principal action focusing on the trials and tribulations of Ayutthaya's Prince Rama, the abduction of his wife, Sita, and the eventual defeat of Langka by Hanuman and his army of monkey warriors.

This is the Ramakian, the epic tale providing story lines for dance, drama, puppet plays and shadow theater. The influence of the Ramakian is so pervasive that nothing could appear more Thai. Ironically, it is not strictly a home-grown product, but rather the local version of the Indian Ramayana epic, and its roll call of gods and demons belongs essentially to the Hindu world of the subcontinent rather than to the Theravada Buddhist land of the Thais. Most cultures of Southeast Asia are rooted in Indian influences which filtered through the region from around the second century AD onwards.

Religious, mythological, linguistic and other elements of Indian culture were absorbed, and thus became especially persuasive. Various local populations adapted and moulded Indian influences to their own ways, gradually evolving cultures that were distinct yet with common roots. Most influential of all was the Ramayana which, along with the Mahabharata, ranks as India's greatest literary work.

Like all the best stories, the Ramayana combines adventure and excitement plus a touch of comic relief with moral edification, and full play is given to strange occurrences in which magic, divination, horoscopes and other mysteries are important elements. In one form or another the epic was incorporated in the cultures of most Southeast Asian civilisations, and was firmly established before the rise of the Thai kingdom. But while the Ramayana's influence stretches way back, the Thai version is a distinctly local creation, as exemplified by the text of King Rama I, written in 1807. It is not known how far King Rama I relied on the vernacular versions of the story which had been passed down through the centuries, nor to what extent he consulted Indian sources, yet it is important to note that he did not merely translate the Ramayana.

The narrative follows the Indian story only in its broad outlines, and there are considerable differences in detail. Names are modified, and dress, customs, ways of life and even the flora assume local distinction. A classic though it is, the Ramakian, unlike western literary landmarks, has impact not through the pages of a handsomely bound book but via myriad art forms. The text is incomparably rich and lends itself naturally to illustration and to theatre in all its forms.

Wat Po (Temple of the Reclining Buddha), Bangkok's oldest and largest temple complex, presents an easily accessible manifestation of the Ramakian's visual impact. On the outer wall of the main chapel is a series of marble bas relief's depicting a selection of connected scenes from the epic tale in a set of 152 panels. The relief's portray the abduction and subsequent rescue of Sita and, for some strange reason, conclude not with the stirring climax of the victory over Langka, but with the death of a minor character before the recovery of Sita. Perhaps the artists simply ran out of space-but then the audience would have been familiar with the tale since childhood. And such is the artistic skill that each panel can be regarded as an individual work of art.

The doors of the main chapel of Wat Po also illustrate the power of the Ramakian in an unusual medium: the exquisite mother-of-pearl inlay work-in which cut pieces are glued onto a paper cartoon and then applied to a permanent and subsequently lacquered surface-which has a long tradition in Thailand and reached its zenith in the mid-19th century. The influence of the Ramakian on temple murals can be seen at nearby Wat Phra Keo (Temple of the Emerald Buddha), in the grounds of the Grand Palace. The tradition of covering interior temple walls with murals dates almost from the birth of Thai ci

http://www.usmta.com/MYTHS%20&%20LEGENDS.htm

http://www.jfbkk.or.th/images/Ramakien_01.jpg

http://www1.thaimain.org/share_image/intro/012.jpg

http://www1.thaimain.org/share_image/intro/013.jpg

srivatsan
22nd April 2006, 09:27 PM
***Even when he brought Sita to his town he did maintain his distance*** ????

What about the undoing of her saree and Hanumanji got there just on time?

Ravana had a curse that if he try to attain a women withour her wish, he would have his head burst in to pieces....Only that prevented him from trying any adventure.

Raghu
22nd April 2006, 10:36 PM
***Even when he brought Sita to his town he did maintain his distance*** ????

What about the undoing of her saree and Hanumanji got there just on time?

Ravana had a curse that if he try to attain a women withour her wish, he would have his head burst in to pieces....Only that prevented him from trying any adventure.

yes that is true, by thw way Srivatsan who is that in ur Avatar?

srivatsan
22nd April 2006, 11:12 PM
***Even when he brought Sita to his town he did maintain his distance*** ????

What about the undoing of her saree and Hanumanji got there just on time?

Ravana had a curse that if he try to attain a women withour her wish, he would have his head burst in to pieces....Only that prevented him from trying any adventure.

yes that is true, by thw way Srivatsan who is that in ur Avatar?

That is Lord Vishnu as Garudaarooda!

Lets us continue discuss on this great Epic:

Raghu
7th December 2006, 10:01 PM
Devotee of Lord Shiva
Following his conquest of Lanka, Ravana encounters Lord Shiva at his abode in Kailash. Unknowingly, Ravana attempts to uproot and move the mountain on a whim. Shiva, annoyed by Ravana's pride and arrogance, merely presses his little toe on Kailash, pins him firmly (and painfully) under the same. His ganas inform Ravana of whom he has crossed, upon which Ravana becomes penitent. He composes and sings songs praising Shiva, and is said to have done so for several years, till Shiva releases him from his bondage. Pleased with his bravery and devotion, Shiva grants him further strength, culminating in his gifting him the Chandrahas (Moon-blade), an immensely powerful sword. Ravana in turn became a lifelong devotee of Lord Shiva. Ravana is known for his dance worship Shiva Tandava Stotra (a form of Stuti) to lord Shiva.Ravana was a great scholar


Ravan had many GOOD qualities, wghich were over shadowed by evil, lets pls discuss such qualities...

leosimha
18th April 2007, 01:47 PM
Raghu,

This is a good thread. Well I have been having a doubt on this for a long time.

We all know that through the Epic Ramayan that Lord Shri Rama killed Vaali, Sugriva's brother without Vaali's knowledge. Don't you all think that this act of Lord Shri Rama is a coveted one? How can we justify this act of Lord Shri Rama?

Badri
19th April 2007, 09:54 AM
Don't you all think that this act of Lord Shri Rama is a coveted one? How can we justify this act of Lord Shri Rama?

:yawn: This has been discussed and done to death. Valmiki raises this question through Vaali's mouth itself. And Vaali who is the affected party is convinced of Rama's reply and agrees that Rama's act is indeed justified. So why should others bother about whether the act is justified or not?

And since the act is Rama's why should we bother about justifying it? :roll:

All this questioning, I am afraid, is merely trying to mask a disputatious intention!

Go back and read the pages of this thread. The so-called justification is bound to be given somewhere. If you dont find it or still have doubts let me know and I will tell you the conversation between Vali and Rama.

Again, when the affected party was convinced, how does it matter to you?

leosimha
19th April 2007, 11:07 AM
:yawn: This has been discussed and done to death. Valmiki raises this question through Vaali's mouth itself. And Vaali who is the affected party is convinced of Rama's reply and agrees that Rama's act is indeed justified. So why should others bother about whether the act is justified or not?

And since the act is Rama's why should we bother about justifying it? :roll:

All this questioning, I am afraid, is merely trying to mask a disputatious intention!

Go back and read the pages of this thread. The so-called justification is bound to be given somewhere. If you dont find it or still have doubts let me know and I will tell you the conversation between Vali and Rama.

Again, when the affected party was convinced, how does it matter to you?

:shaking: friend badri...hmm...It doesn't matter me if Lord Shri Rama has killed Vaali through coveted means which is not at all a means of WAR.

I was just trying to know if this is best means or not. Lord Shri Rama is known for his truthfulness, honesty, bravery and this act of his not at all justified.

By the way I will go through the conversation if I find it out...

Shakthiprabha.
19th April 2007, 01:28 PM
In my opinion,

All human beings, whether accepted as incarnations of god, or not, HAVE FOLLIES inherent in them.

I cannot agree any JUSTIFICATION or branching stories to relate to any such action.


Instead of concentrating on
'WHY DID HE DO IT' it would be wiser to study their virtues and be done with it.

period.

Shakthiprabha.
19th April 2007, 01:32 PM
Devotee of Lord Shiva
Ravana was a great scholar


Ravan had many GOOD qualities, wghich were over shadowed by evil, lets pls discuss such qualities...

One quality which IS I ADMIRE, rather, praise ...

is he abstaining from touching any woman, WITHOUT HER WISH!

:clap: :clap:

Badri
19th April 2007, 02:16 PM
Devotee of Lord Shiva
Ravana was a great scholar


Ravan had many GOOD qualities, wghich were over shadowed by evil, lets pls discuss such qualities...

One quality which IS I ADMIRE, rather, praise ...

is he abstaining from touching any woman, WITHOUT HER WISH!

:clap: :clap:

The Ramayana says that is because he was afraid of a curse and not out of any respect for womanhood or control over his lust.

He kidnapped a woman, imprisoned her forcibly and caused her endless sorrow and torture through his words. And you admire and praise him because he didnt touch her out of fear? Do you think he who perpretated so much atrocity against a woman would have not touched her if the curse hadnt been active?

What a thing to admire in a man when his very downfall was because of that!!

SP I am really surprised! :roll:

Shakthiprabha.
19th April 2007, 02:37 PM
Sorry! I did not know it was out of fear badri :oops:

sheesh, I am not really qualified to talk on epics :D

dsath
19th April 2007, 03:20 PM
The Ramayana says that is because he was afraid of a curse and not out of any respect for womanhood or control over his lust.

He kidnapped a woman, imprisoned her forcibly and caused her endless sorrow and torture through his words. And you admire and praise him because he didnt touch her out of fear? Do you think he who perpretated so much atrocity against a woman would have not touched her if the curse hadnt been active?


Badri,can you elaborate the curse please? I am hearing it for the first time and would like to know more.

Raghu
19th April 2007, 03:41 PM
Dsath,

No, badri is right, there was a curse casted upon Ravan, that if he touches any women, he would be burt or something....

Besides, In Ramayan, as far as I know, It is told that Ravan was a womaniser, but then again, if he was not he would not have kidnapped sita, he went to the forest to kill the person(Lakshaman) who cut of Soorpanahai's nose, but Ravan fell for the beauty of Sita and fell for her, hence he kidnapped her...

dsath
19th April 2007, 05:30 PM
Dsath,

No, badri is right, there was a curse casted upon Ravan, that if he touches any women, he would be burt or something....

Besides, In Ramayan, as far as I know, It is told that Ravan was a womaniser, but then again, if he was not he would not have kidnapped sita, he went to the forest to kill the person(Lakshaman) who cut of Soorpanahai's nose, but Ravan fell for the beauty of Sita and fell for her, hence he kidnapped her...
Raghu, i am not disagreeing with Badri. I am just interested in knowing the story behind the curse. How and why he got the curse? :)

podalangai
19th April 2007, 05:35 PM
This has been discussed and done to death. Valmiki raises this question through Vaali's mouth itself. And Vaali who is the affected party is convinced of Rama's reply and agrees that Rama's act is indeed justified.

Since this is a predominantly Tamil forum, why do people not look at how Kambar interprets the significance of the killing of Valin? Unlike Valmiki, who tries to address the problems arising out of Ramapiran's act in moral terms, Kambar very expressly and clearly addresses them in religious terms. :)

kannannn
19th April 2007, 06:07 PM
Kribanandha Vaariyar has an interesting take on Vaali's killing: "Can we expect the police to follow the speed limit when they are trying to catch a criminal driving above the speed limit?"

Shakthiprabha.
19th April 2007, 08:22 PM
I am extremely bad with memory.

Now that I try to recollect,
if I remember right,

he had lured a woman (forgot her name) saint, in his previous birth.

He tried forcing her despite her warnings.

She burnt herself alive and cursed ravana that, if he touches any woman, without her approval, he would burn to ashes.

If I remember right, THE SAME SAINT (woman) is born as seetha .

leosimha
20th April 2007, 10:57 AM
Madam SP,

I think the saint woman which you are talking about is Vedavathi and when Ravana abducted "Sita", it is believed that it is not "Sita" who was abducted and it was Vedavathi.

Can somebody clarify if I am correct and elaborate it?

Nakeeran
20th April 2007, 01:57 PM
In one telugu movie, they show Ravana also participating in that test of lifting the bow and commissioning it ( I mean , the event when Ram enters Mithila and breaks the bow and also marries Sita ).
ofcouse, Ravana fails to put the naan into the bow and loses the challenge .
How far is it true ? Did Ravana see Sita earlier in that case ?

Unfortunately, we see too many such things in movies and very difficult to conclude which version is authenticated.

Nakeeran
20th April 2007, 02:02 PM
Was there any exchange of thoughts on whose role was more sincere / dharmic.

I mean KUMBAKARNA or VIBISHANA .

The former stood by his brother and died for him

The latter was thrown out by his brother and went straight to Ram and took shelter. Also was instrumental in telling Ram , the finer aspect of how to eliminate Ravan.

Lets discuss who was more sincere.

Shakthiprabha.
20th April 2007, 03:12 PM
I take the side of VIBEESHANA.

He tried to persuade, on his failure to persuade his bro, he went on to take the side of RIGHTEOUSNESS.

A quality NOT MANY CAN POSSESS :clap:


Sir leosimha,

Yes, I think its vEdavathi :?
Like I said, I am quite forgetful :(

Raghu
20th April 2007, 07:41 PM
In one telugu movie, they show Ravana also participating in that test of lifting the bow and commissioning it ( I mean , the event when Ram enters Mithila and breaks the bow and also marries Sita ).
ofcouse, Ravana fails to put the naan into the bow and loses the challenge .
How far is it true ? Did Ravana see Sita earlier in that case ?

Unfortunately, we see too many such things in movies and very difficult to conclude which version is authenticated.

R u talking about ShivaThanushu???

Nakeeran
20th April 2007, 08:30 PM
Yes Raghu sir.

The dhanusu which Sri Ram will lift it and while trying to tie the knot, it will break.

Any idea if Ravan was present there ? We cant trust telugu movies. At times, they do their value add. I have seen some horrible movies like Rama -Hanuman yudham !

Raghu
20th April 2007, 09:04 PM
Yes Raghu sir.

The dhanusu which Sri Ram will lift it and while trying to tie the knot, it will break.

Any idea if Ravan was present there ? We cant trust telugu movies. At times, they do their value add. I have seen some horrible movies like Rama -Hanuman yudham !

No, Never heard of it, as far as i know Sita's Father ONLY invited kings from India not Lanka...

leosimha
21st April 2007, 11:11 AM
In one telugu movie, they show Ravana also participating in that test of lifting the bow and commissioning it ( I mean , the event when Ram enters Mithila and breaks the bow and also marries Sita ).
ofcouse, Ravana fails to put the naan into the bow and loses the challenge .
How far is it true ? Did Ravana see Sita earlier in that case ?

Unfortunately, we see too many such things in movies and very difficult to conclude which version is authenticated.

Again, a good question? Some say yes and some say no. Some say that even though Ravana was not invited, he came to the Kingdom of Janaka as he had heard a lot about Sita's beauty.

Vaz
27th July 2007, 09:06 PM
I wish to thank Raghu for starting this wonderful thread and ALL the others (Mr Sudhaama, Mr Hari Krishnan, Mr Badri and Mr Viggop) for sharing so many valuable information on Lord Shri Ram.

Being in a foreign country since my childhood, I have only had a few occasions to be exposed to such interesting discussions! I used to think and wish to be in India so that I could have my questions about Ramayanam, Mahabaratha and Hinduism answered.

Having gone through the 30 pages of this thread... it is almost as if most of my questions on Ramayanam have been answered!

So again thank you all!!!

Vasanth.

PS: Is there any good translation of Ramayanam in english available on the net?

Vaz
1st August 2007, 03:37 PM
Hello,

Unfortunatly most of the links (from chennailonline.com) provided by Mr Harikrishnan are not working anymore...

Does anybody know where else I can find his articles? Character studies, details on some specific episodes of the Ramayana, etc.

Thanks in advance,
Vasanth.

Raghu
1st August 2007, 03:57 PM
I wish to thank Raghu for starting this wonderful thread and ALL the others (Mr Sudhaama, Mr Hari Krishnan, Mr Badri and Mr Viggop) for sharing so many valuable information on Lord Shri Ram.

Being in a foreign country since my childhood, I have only had a few occasions to be exposed to such interesting discussions! I used to think and wish to be in India so that I could have my questions about Ramayanam, Mahabaratha and Hinduism answered.

Having gone through the 30 pages of this thread... it is almost as if most of my questions on Ramayanam have been answered!

So again thank you all!!!

Vasanth.

PS: Is there any good translation of Ramayanam in english available on the net?

Dear vasanth

No problem, if you are in UK, u can buy these books at the ISKON centres in London, it is near Oxford circus station, would you like further info:)

Raghu
1st August 2007, 03:57 PM
Have you visited my other threads called Mahabharth and 63 Gnayanmarghal Maheshwar Bakthas??

Vaz
1st August 2007, 05:10 PM
Hi Raghu,

Thanks for the indications but I do not live in UK...
Anyway found a few good online translations of Ramayanam. I'll definitly buy one when I have the occasion.

I'll definitly check the thread about Mahabartham. Because for me, it is the most difficult one to understand... i.e. what is good, what is bad... Losing a Kingdom in such a way... then fighting to get back something you have willingly put at stake...

Till now (I'm quite young) I've voluntarily kept myself from going too "deep" into the Mahabaratha because I was affraid of not having answers to my questions... But now I'm hopeful that there'll be many people that will be able to answer my questions
(if they have not already been answered) thanks to this forum.

Cheers,
Vasanth.

Sudhaama
2nd August 2007, 12:12 AM
.
.Ramayana & Mahabharatha God-made LIFE-DRAMAS..

...Practical Guidance to Commonman of Humanity.


Hi Raghu,

Thanks for the indications but I do not live in UK...

Anyway found a few good online translations of Ramayanam. I'll definitly buy one when I have the occasion.

I'll definitly check the thread about Mahabartham. Because for me, it is the most difficult one to understand... i.e. what is good, what is bad... Losing a Kingdom in such a way... then fighting to get back something you have willingly put at stake...

Till now (I'm quite young) I've voluntarily kept myself from going too "deep" into the Mahabaratha because I was affraid of not having answers to my questions... But now I'm hopeful that there'll be many people that will be able to answer my questions
(if they have not already been answered) thanks to this forum.

Cheers,
Vasanth.

Welcome dear friend Vasanth,

Basically we have to remember that the Awatharas like Ramayana and Mahabharatha are LEELAS... God's Play on Earth...

...to explicitly show in a SIMPLE MANNER to Humanity... in addition to Gospels and Preachings...

What is Life?...Why we are born?...How to face the Circumstances of sorts?... practically??...

...Especially under Paradoxical or Dilemma Situations of Dharma-Sangata???...

Thus these Epics are NOT JUST MEANT FOR ONLY HINDUS...

..but also the whole Global Society.. of Mankind of any Religion, Nation or such Vivi-sections of the World Society.

.When Good people change their due Right-track... what happens is, Ramayana.

When Bad elements and Wicked People rise up to Power.. what happens is, Mahabharatha...

...the so called FIFTH VEDA documented by Lord Vigneswara.

Well. our Dear Friends...especially the Youth...

...after reading these Two whole Threads initiated by Mr Raghu.. on Ramayana and Mahabharatha... which is Self-explanatory

...Please put forth your Comments, Doubts and Questions...

... in a Wise and Open-minded manner.

We all are happy to reply to you... in as simple Language as possible.
.

Vaz
9th August 2007, 02:18 PM
I was going through Rajaji's retelling of the Ramayana and I found it surprising the way he dealt (or as a matter of fact not properly dealt) with the Vali episode...

If I understood correctly...

1. According to Valmiki the justification was that Sri Ram being from a noble family did not have to face "an animal" before killing it... "when a hunter hunts a beast, he does not wait for a face to face before killing it..." It is also hinted that Sri Ram would have been in a delicate position had Vali surrendered to him... in which case the promise he made to Sugreeva could be have been threatened...

2. In the other version it is justified by saying that Vali has commited crimes that are atroucious and so he lost his "right" to have a proper confrontation with Sri Ram...

I feel that the first version is quite demeaning... if we think about how Hanuman helped the Lord... Did I understand correctly or am i completly wrong about this?

Can anyone throw some light on this issue/episode of the Ramayana? Rajaji (such a good devotee of Sri Ram) just admitted that the Lord's actions in this particular case are not justifiable... so it is quite disturbing

I tried the links provided by Mr Hari Krishnan but they do not seem to be working anymore...

Nakeeran
9th August 2007, 03:01 PM
[tscii:d7a5a40257]Vaz,

The act of Sri Rama killing Valee from behind is actually an assault on his valour . It questions the fundamentals of his bravery & war skills. Apparently , Rama knew of Valees strengths & boon that whomsoever he faces against, he gets the power of becoming equal to the opponent & hence the act of Rama hitting Valee from an unknown place.
This is the reason why even Sri Rajaji was upset with the act of Rama who is known for setting the highest standards on any aspect of life >>> be it respect to parents or Guru or treating a friend or a foe or treating a woman with respect or administering his subjects. Sri Rama had been a model for all of us.
So, whatever may be the justification attemped by writers like >>> Valee took away the wife of Sugriva or throwing out Sugreeva etc etc.
You know, what was the first question asked by Valee to Rama ??
How come you have done this act ! Of all the persons !! Valee was more shocked by the attitude of Rama becaz, Valee highly regarded Rama as a man of highest standards .

Remember the same Rama later proved his class when he asked an almost finished Ravana to go back and come the next day !!
[/tscii:d7a5a40257]

P_R
9th August 2007, 03:37 PM
[tscii:46cdf10645]
Rama knew of Valees strengths & boon that whomsoever he faces against, he gets the power of becoming equal to the opponent & hence the act of Rama hitting Valee from an unknown place.
Wasn't Vali's boon that he would obtain half of the strength of the opponent who faces him, in addition to his own strength. This is not 'equal strength'. This gives him an unfair advantage and makes it impossible for him to be defeated by anyone who faces him from the front.[/tscii:46cdf10645]

Badri
10th August 2007, 05:19 AM
I was going through Rajaji's retelling of the Ramayana and I found it surprising the way he dealt (or as a matter of fact not properly dealt) with the Vali episode...

If I understood correctly...

1. According to Valmiki the justification was that Sri Ram being from a noble family did not have to face "an animal" before killing it... "when a hunter hunts a beast, he does not wait for a face to face before killing it..." It is also hinted that Sri Ram would have been in a delicate position had Vali surrendered to him... in which case the promise he made to Sugreeva could be have been threatened...

2. In the other version it is justified by saying that Vali has commited crimes that are atroucious and so he lost his "right" to have a proper confrontation with Sri Ram...

I feel that the first version is quite demeaning... if we think about how Hanuman helped the Lord... Did I understand correctly or am i completly wrong about this?

Can anyone throw some light on this issue/episode of the Ramayana? Rajaji (such a good devotee of Sri Ram) just admitted that the Lord's actions in this particular case are not justifiable... so it is quite disturbing

I tried the links provided by Mr Hari Krishnan but they do not seem to be working anymore...

I had already written about this, but let me post it once again.

Vali asks Rama why he should kill him, when he had no cause for enmity whatsoever.

Rama explains the whole "stealing away the wife being against dharma" concepts.

Vali retorts by saying "We are vanaras. These dharmas dont apply to us. We are animals"

Please note that this is Vali's own statement in which he says I am an animal and human dharmas dont apply.

Rama then replies, "If you are only an animal, and these dharmas dont apply to you, then there is no dharma against hunting animals. Neither is there any dharma that one should face the animal while killing it."

Vali acknowledges the logic in this.

Eventually, Vali recognises the validity of Rama's actions, and seeks the boon of Moksha from him. He also calls Angada his son by his side, and explains to him how Rama is the Lord Himself, and bids him aid Rama in his mission.

Now, let me come to my telling statement (which I invariably make at the conclusion of this episode)

If the victim, Vali, did not have any complaints finally and was convinced that Rama did not do anything wrong, why are we breaking our heads over whether this was right or wrong?

bingleguy
10th August 2007, 06:24 AM
:-) Jay Shri Ram !

Nakeeran
10th August 2007, 09:34 AM
[tscii:cddf91db23]Whether the affected party Valee himself accepts the verdict is immaterial. It doesnt justify Ramas established traits.

Rama is a wonderful character & infact a role model to us but in case of Valee, there is a clear flaw & dent in his trait.

Why Rama didnt talk to Valee & initiate peace process between the 2 brothers ?

How come he presumed that killing Valee is the only solution to this Sugriva issue ?

Instead, he could have disarmed Valee & should have attempted for truce between the 2 brothers.

Ram could have easily advised Valee to put an end to his misdeeds.

The way he approached Ravana , he could have done that to Valee also. ( He sent messengers through Angadha as a final attempt to stop the war ). He was so graceful on day 1 when he advised a defeated Ravana to go back, take rest & come again !

After all, as regards the nature of crime >>>> was similar in the case of both Valee & Ravana .

The act of Rama in the case of Valee is UNILATERAL .


[/tscii:cddf91db23]

Nakeeran
10th August 2007, 03:18 PM
[tscii:112b52d262]If one analyzes the background of Valee, before he had that misunderstanding with Sugreeva, there was nothing negative about Valee.

None of the subjects criticized Valee

If Valee had been a bad guy really, his wife would not have admired him .

Valee was so mighty powerful that he even tamed Ravana apparently .

Did Rama check with any of the subjects of Valee ?? ( even after the explanation from Hanuman )

Valee had no direct impact on the path of Rama. It was purely on his commitment to Sugriva that Rama had to kill him. I strongly feel that Rama should have tried for a truce between the 2 brothers. Instead, he killed Valee unilaterally.

Lets assume a hypothetical situation that Rama approaches Valee & tries to establish peace but Valee refuses to oblige. This might have left with no option for Ram but to fight against Valee. Here, the question of equal strength & competency comes. I think, he had pre-empted this & decided to eliminate Valee.

The great Rama , well known for his famous SARANAGADHI philosophy, unfortunately didnt apply his principle on Valee.

SADLY, RAMA KILLED SOMEONE WHO HAD NO DIRECT CONNECTION TO HIS LIFE
[/tscii:112b52d262]

Madh@va
24th August 2007, 11:37 AM
[tscii:fb020e080a]
That is the problem. So many versions. I have even heard of one version where Sita is Ravanna's daughter; the deva whom he took by force left her near King Janaka's palace.
Actually, I watched a movie regarding this version last evening.
When Mandodari delivers a baby girl, Brahma proclaims to Ravana that this child will destroy Lanka/him. Therefore, Ravana will plot to throw the child into the river without his wife's knowledge. Though he did order the child to be disposed, his heart was still longing for his daughter. Ravana was a devoted father who was keeping tabs on his daughters well being as she was growing up. Each time he wanted to reveal the truth to the world, his brothers would stop him indicating what will the world think of a scheming King who even disposed his child for his own sake.

His ego(?) prevails and he decides not to reveal this even to his wife after she suspects that Ravana intends to cavort Seetha. Of course, he was aided by his brother who insisted that Ravanan should keep it a secret. Only to have this very brother to join Rama later during the war.
---------------
Soorpanakai, comes in only to test Rama's virtue and comes back to report to her brother that Seetha in good hands, with both her husband and brother in law being chaste. Ravana is relieved to hear this. It is Soorpanakai who suggests to Ravana that he should bring Seetha to Lanka and explain to her the truth. Unfortunately, things get out of hand with Rama closing on with his army after Seetha was brought to Lanka.
---------------
Ravana goes to Lord Shiva to release him from the pain he is suffering.
Lord Shiva tells to him that even the Lord cannot undo this as it was a curse of a chaste lady. Lord Shiva then discloses to the shocked Ravana that at one point Ravana had laid his eyes on a female hermit who was meditating to become Lord Vishnus consort. Angered by Ravanas behaviour she curses him that she will be back to destroy him and self immolates thereafter.

And thus she is born as Seetha to avenge Ravana.
---------------
In the beginning of the movie, Ravana (shown in the guise of a hermit(?)) speaks to (?) indicating that Valmiki & Kamban misrepresented his story. In the end, Maha Vishnu shows his form to Ravana and acknowledges his intentions. If I got it right, Ravana is then granted to be born as Sisupala (?).
[/tscii:fb020e080a]

Sudhaama
19th October 2007, 03:46 AM
.
.Rama was an Ordinary Human Being..??? !!





Ram Chand passed away, as did Rawan, even though he had lots of relatives. Says Nanak, nothing lasts forever; the world is like a dream. (Guru Granth Sahib Ji, Ang 1429)

This shows that Guru Ji considered Rama and Rawana as regular humans. Guru Ji saw them both as one. So this means that Hindu lord Rama is not God.

When Rama was exiled, he shot a king named Bali from behind and killed him. What a coward? What kind of bravery is that? Why would God attack someone from behind? This was a complete betrayal by Rama in the battlefield.

When Rama started fighting with Ravana to get his wife back his brother Lacchman passed out. He started crying and told Hanuman (a monkey God) that if his brother dies he will die with him by committing suicide. The truth is NO brave man ever cries in the battlefield. This shows that Rama lost himself in the battlefield, which shows weakness of mind and heart. According to Hindu historians, Rama was helped by all the gods and goddesses in the battlefield. What kind of a God needs help in the battlefield?

http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/sikh-sikhi-sikhism/16052-rss-exposed-question-9-a.html.

It is a painful remark on a Divine Character .. the God-form Rama.

I am unable to believe, whether the Sikhism really mock at so.?

Swami Guru Nanak Dev is a Great prophet... and revered Seer...

...who had broad-mindedly spread the Universal-Love as also preached and endeavoured much to unite all the Splinter groups of the divided people of Society... (especially Hindus and Muslims)

...under one Umbrella of Mankind...breaking away all the sorts of Religious barriors...

..by realising the true sense of any Religion.. as One God common to Humanity.

Ramayana is one of the Great Epics of Hindu Religion... as well as one of the Exemplary Heritage of Indian Nation as well.

Such sort of criticisms and Mockeries by one Religious preachers on other Religions... have become common, without exception, since more than two centuries..

Swami Vivekananda had faced even the worst denigrations on the Hindu Religious faith .. by some Non-Hindu Religious preachers.

Such mockeries on Lord Rama shows the critics ignorance.

Taking these questions in the healthy sense... we can answer.
.

harishkumar09
2nd February 2008, 10:59 AM
According to Madhva it is a sin to kill sinners from the front.Sinners should always be killed from behind in an "adharmic" fashion , that is dharma.

Vali was a great sinner for he ran away with another person's wife.So Rama upheld dharma by killing from behind.

Bhima also upheld dharma by hiting duryodhana below the belt.

But this lesson was lost on the medieval hindu warriors who showered gifts on islamic invaders and became very famous for their generosity.

harishkumar09
2nd February 2008, 11:02 AM
One does not cry because one is a coward.This is a myth in the Indian society.One cries because one can no longer be with ones loved ones and cannot hear them speak and can no longer interact with them.The separation causes sadness.

But in Indian society when we cry because some one is dead and and no more , they tell us to be brave !

What a joke !

joe
2nd February 2008, 02:11 PM
According to Madhva it is a sin to kill sinners from the front..

ஓகோ :o

Sudhaama
2nd February 2008, 08:22 PM
.
.Vali the TRAITOR... over-benefitted.!!


According to Madhva it is a sin to kill sinners from the front.Sinners should always be killed from behind in an "adharmic" fashion , that is dharma.

Vali was a great sinner for he ran away with another person's wife.So Rama upheld dharma by killing from behind.

Bhima also upheld dharma by hiting duryodhana below the belt.

But this lesson was lost on the medieval hindu warriors who showered gifts on islamic invaders and became very famous for their generosity.

Sanathana Dharma or Vedic-Dharma is only one common for all the Vedic followers...

...and no separate Maadhwa dharma or Sankara- dharma or the like.

No doubt sectarial customs differ...amongst different sects one of which is Madhwa.

Regarding Vali.. it has already been discussed repeatedly and analytically... May be referred in previous postings...
..and if further any questions are necessary... our friends are welcome.

In brief... let us consider an example..

One Dacoit knows all the sorts of modern teqniques of Computer, Mobile phone, Remote control bombing etc...

The Police department is finding it difficult to round him up because of his overall super capacity.

Then the Police department catches hold of one of their wisest Inspector and deputes him for the purpose...

...after giiving him special training.. plus arming him strongly with mightiest weapons more than those possessed by the Dacoit.

But after taking up the special assignment.. the Inspector befriended with the Dacoit...

.. as well as he became another Dacoit... parallelly.... misusing the Mightiest weapons and Knowledge of Police-Secrets.

Even after several advices and Warnings... he has forsaken his purpose of Special mights and Vital Police Knowledge bestowed.

Then what will the police department do.?

Is he Warrior.?... Or even an Enemy... No but an utter TRAITOR.

So was Vali a Traitor... misusing and unduly exploiting his purpose of birth with special super-powers.

Yes. Vali was the Awathara of Indra... and Ravana his BITTEST ENEMY since was defeated by him.

Besides Indra was facing a constant threat and challenge from Ravana... after his defeat by Indrajit

..that at any time... the whole Deva-lokam may fall under the control of Ravana

So on the fervent appeal of Indra to Brahma... Indra was given birth as Vali... bestowing greatest might ever on Earth...

..by which whover confronts Vali... that Enemy's half strength will be gained by Vali... by means of such a rare boon.

But what happened.? Instead of antagonising and eliminating his Worst enemy Ravana...

..Vali befriended Ravana... and allowed him to continue his atrocities...

...thus not only forsaking his purpose of birth as Vali.. but also worsening the situation...

..by causing more crimes like snatching away his brother Sugreeva's wife.!

Then the Supreme Police... the God had to treat Vali as the TRAITOR to be eliminated from Earth....

..without giving Room for Vali .. to gain HALF THE MIGHTS of Rama by confronting him face to face.

When Vali questions Rama... he was duly replied on which Vali was convinced and apologised to Rama.

Finally Vali was rendered by Rama... the Greatest status... Moksha.!!..

Does he deserve it.?.. Was it not his gain and reward... in return for his Misdeeds.?
.

harishkumar09
3rd February 2008, 07:06 PM
Not just Rama but if you look at the Scriptures we see that all the devatas and Vishnu in all his avataras killed the demons only by deception and trickery even though the devatas are powerful enough to kill the demons from the front easily.

The devatas discriminate between the divine and the demoniacal.The one deserves respect and a decent if not a valiant death.The other does not.

Even Shiva and Parvati killed many demons through deception a and trickery.

We must not judge the devatas by Rajput standards or the standards set by the Human Rights activists who say a terrorist should be given the same royal treatment as the policeman.HR activists claim ultimately they are human.While the devatas accept that , they see a difference between humans who are of a divine nature and also who are of a demoniacal nature , and give respect to one and not to the other.

harishkumar09
3rd February 2008, 07:08 PM
Yes there is only one Sanatana Dharma and that was properly expounded by Madhva.The other two interpretations are false and incorrect.

harishkumar09
3rd February 2008, 07:08 PM
Vali is the Avatara of Surya and not Indra.Sugriva was Indra.

harishkumar09
3rd February 2008, 07:11 PM
Rama has already proved his bravery against Ravana.He even asked him to come next day fully armed.Why ?

Because Ravana was one of the dwarapalakas of Vaikunta.They were cursed to be born as demons thrice in planet earth.Vishnu took three avatars to take them back (apart from other things).So since Ravana was actually a great devotee of Rama (but he was temporarily ignorant of the fact , as he was under Asura avesa) , Rama respected him and attacked him from front.

No need for Rama to prove his bravery against that beast Vali.

harishkumar09
3rd February 2008, 07:19 PM
I have discussed this more elaborately at

http://harishkumar09.sulekha.com/blog/post/2007/10/three-points-concerning-the-ramayana.htm

You can also check : http://www.indiamystica.com

Sudhaama
3rd February 2008, 09:24 PM
.
. Religions are intended to UPLIFT the Humanity on the Whole.!!!

...Not to DIVIDE... Nor mutually Hate & Quarrel.!!


Not just Rama but if you look at the Scriptures we see that all the devatas and Vishnu in all his avataras killed the demons only by deception and trickery even though the devatas are powerful enough to kill the demons from the front easily.

The devatas discriminate between the divine and the demoniacal.The one deserves respect and a decent if not a valiant death.The other does not.

Even Shiva and Parvati killed many demons through deception a and trickery.

We must not judge the devatas by Rajput standards or the standards set by the Human Rights activists who say a terrorist should be given the same royal treatment as the policeman.HR activists claim ultimately they are human.While the devatas accept that , they see a difference between humans who are of a divine nature and also who are of a demoniacal nature , and give respect to one and not to the other.

Dear harishkumar09

Yes. Well-said.

We have to remember the purpose of Awatharas. Why.?

The answer to this fundamental question... highlights the Greatness of Vedic Religion... far differeing from other Religions...

..where they do not believe in God's Awathara or Descension by Incarnation

Then What for such Awatharas inviting undue sufferings for Gods and Godesses themselves.?

Mankind may at any stage are prone to think... out of Ignorance or Innocence or Impatience or Indolence or Intolerance...

...at least any one person... even at any one stage and moment in his Life, as...

..."Oh He is after all God... He has never faced such challenges, sufferings and dilemmic situations in His Life..

...as we the pitiable Mankind is trapped within the cruel hands of Fate on Earthly birth.

Because God is an AJAAYAMAANA (Birthless)... as also free from Karmas... unlike we, the sinners Human-beings.!

... So it is easy to preach such impracticable Theories in the name of Gospels...

..similar to a Bachelor Saint... preaching or guiding a newly wed on Married life.

...So it is difficult and impossible for practice... especially in the midst of varied sorts of people including the worst Sinners, Criminals and Human-formed Animals and Vultures...

...If God really have confronted with similar circumstances by living practically on Earth... then He cannot preach such Theoretical Sermons to us.

Or at least any person... may just reluctantly follow the Ideals.. or may not be wholeheartedly sincere to its sense...

..or may perhaps be not much serious in the Gods Gospels like Bhagawad Geetha, Vedas and the allied Holy Scriptures...

...culminating in Lame-excuses backed by Escapist attitude.

Such a possibility or probability exists and it is quite natural under the helpless circumstances of Mankind at any stage.

So to explain His Gospels of Words... through practical DEMONSTRATION... or Dramas or Plays by all the Gods... in simplified forms...

Gods have descended to such a low level of place and undue sufferings problems... in the names of Awatharas.

In brief what is shown by Awatharas are the Lessons for our Life... by action supported by justifications..

Hence a different Yardstick has to be applied while facing a Dharmaathma...

...differentiating by approach towards a Criminal


Yes there is only one Sanatana Dharma and that was properly expounded by Madhva.The other two interpretations are false and incorrect.

You can very well say... that Sri Madhwacharya's interpretations are Great and highly honourable.

Well.!.. Nothing Wrong to say so... since it only shows your high reverance and PERSONAL ATTACHMENT towards that particular Seer Acharya.

If you stop saying that only.. it is OK.

...But nobody should say that... THE OTHER TWO ARE WRONG.

Every wife can say "My Husband is Great"..

But NOT AS "Your Husband is NOT GREAT like my Husband... All other Husbands are INFERIOR to my Husband" ..

...or the similar denigration or decry... on others

We have to remember the truth... that the Godess Saraswathi-devi had duly recognised all the Three Acharyas... Sri Madhwacharya, Sri Sankaracharya and Sri Ramanujacharya...

...as well as approved and HONOURED their individual treatises by naming them as...

...Madhwa-Baashya, Sankara-Bhaashya and Sri-Bhaashya. !!!

None of us are more knowledged than the Goddess Saraswathi-devi...

...nor qualified to discriminate nor criticise nor under-rate...

...anyone of those three Worshipful Great Acharya Seers.... Awathaara Purushas.!!

All those Revered Mahaans were deputed by One God to EMANCIPATE the Humanity on the whole.!!!
.

piyush111
5th February 2008, 11:19 AM
hi,
why are we discussing the evil qualities of Ravana? Still we have lot more to learn from this epic. Why don't we try to implement the best qualities of Lord Rama? Isn't it a good way to make our lives more comfortable? And as for Ravana, he was there to perform his duties, he too was a great great scholar.

harishkumar09
24th February 2008, 12:17 PM
Madhva has said it is not only important to recgnise what is true but also denounce what is false.Denunciation of falsehood is necessary for salvation.One should know what is right and also what is wrong. He has already proved the logical inconsistencies and deviation from scriptures as far as the Bhasyas of Shankara and Ramanuja are concerned and declared that they are incapable of giving salvation.He however has appreciated the historical role these two played in protecting sanatana dharma.

For this attitude he was disliked in his times and his followers are hated in modern times. Why not simply say all are one and the same or the three commentaries are three ways of reaching the same One ? That will lead to peace and harmony. But Madhva prefers strife and conflict if it can bring out the truth rather than peace and harmony which leads to ignorance.

He encouraged a tradition of debates and asked people to question everything even if it lead to fights. Ultimately he preferred a thinking population who debated and even at the end came to a wrong conclusion rather than a peaceful population of yes men.

Also there is no scriptural pramanas to say that Saraswati authorised all three bhasyas.

In fact according to Madhva , Saraswati accepts his commentary only as the correct one and rejects the other two as incorrect and false.

Its pretty painful to read all this , but as Prabhupada once said , the business of a Vaishnavite is to tell the truth and not to get a certificate of good conduct from the society.

CLUELESS
7th April 2008, 01:14 AM
i am a late comer to this site.
renarrating ramayana is my main passion.

the discussions between vali (in his dying moments) and rama is of great significance.
shall be grateful if hubbers can throw more light on this topic.
thanks,
CLUELESS

CLUELESS
16th June 2008, 12:18 PM
i am still waiting for some inputs from fellow hubbers???????????????????????

Badri
16th June 2008, 12:34 PM
i am still waiting for some inputs from fellow hubbers???????????????????????

You certainly are clueless, arent you? :)

That topic has been discussed so many times that everyone's probably bored to death! Just go through the many pages of this thread. You will find exhaustive, even multiple discussions on the same.

CLUELESS
16th June 2008, 02:48 PM
dear hubber badri,
thanks for the info - will go through the pages.
regards,
CLUELESS

Jimano
16th June 2008, 03:08 PM
Madhva has said it is not only important to recgnise what is true but also denounce what is false.Denunciation of falsehood is necessary for salvation.One should know what is right and also what is wrong. He has already proved the logical inconsistencies and deviation from scriptures as far as the Bhasyas of Shankara and Ramanuja are concerned and declared that they are incapable of giving salvation.He however has appreciated the historical role these two played in protecting sanatana dharma.

Neither Madhvacharya nor anyone have absolute monopoly over truth (God) or salvation.


Its pretty painful to read all this , but as Prabhupada once said , the business of a Vaishnavite is to tell the truth and not to get a certificate of good conduct from the society

Haresh, do you accept Prabhupada's (Iskcon) authority ?

Raghu
24th June 2008, 02:11 PM
Madhva has said it is not only important to recgnise what is true but also denounce what is false.Denunciation of falsehood is necessary for salvation.One should know what is right and also what is wrong. He has already proved the logical inconsistencies and deviation from scriptures as far as the Bhasyas of Shankara and Ramanuja are concerned and declared that they are incapable of giving salvation.He however has appreciated the historical role these two played in protecting sanatana dharma.

Neither Madhvacharya nor anyone have absolute monopoly over truth (God) or salvation.


Its pretty painful to read all this , but as Prabhupada once said , the business of a Vaishnavite is to tell the truth and not to get a certificate of good conduct from the society

Haresh, do you accept Prabhupada's (Iskcon) authority ?

Hmm good question, ISKON contradicts with Saivam, it regards Lord Krisna to the supreme, where else majority of the hindus regard Maheswar as the supreme(including me)

hence the saying

Guru Bramha, guru vishnu guru devo maheswara

Sudhaama
24th June 2008, 10:32 PM
.
Which God SUPREME.?

This is A VEXED QUESTION...

...Leading towards Unending debate...

... radically out of RELEVANCE for a devotee or follower of any Faith...

..as also far away..out of purpose on the rudiments of GOD-FAITH itself.

Ramanujacharya has categorically and convincingly handled this Age-old QUESTION...

...OVERSTRETCHED... dragging towards a SUICIDAL pursuit on God.

This may be a topic for a religious debate by scholars...

...but totally OUT OF PURPOSE for any devotee or common public or the follower

What does it matter for any devotee...

..whether the Great God MAHA-DEVA is supreme..?..or..

... the other Great God MAHA-VISHNU.? ..or..

..the Great Goddess MAHA-KALI.?

Vedic Religion is an optimistic and large-hearted pursuit... imparting widest choices and freedom for every devotee...

...as one may INDIVIDUALLY feel apt for oneself...

...according to ones own perception and understanding...

... as one FEELS by Soul and Heart.

Ramayana has demonstrated such a Gospel... by action.

In brief...

Periappa's Children are NOT GREATER ... NOR SUPERIOR ...

...than the Chiththappa's children.!





Madhva has said it is not only important to recgnise what is true but also denounce what is false.Denunciation of falsehood is necessary for salvation.One should know what is right and also what is wrong. He has already proved the logical inconsistencies and deviation from scriptures as far as the Bhasyas of Shankara and Ramanuja are concerned and declared that they are incapable of giving salvation.He however has appreciated the historical role these two played in protecting sanatana dharma.

Neither Madhvacharya nor anyone have absolute monopoly over truth (God) or salvation.


Its pretty painful to read all this , but as Prabhupada once said , the business of a Vaishnavite is to tell the truth and not to get a certificate of good conduct from the society

Haresh, do you accept Prabhupada's (Iskcon) authority ?

Hmm good question, ISKON contradicts with Saivam, it regards Lord Krisna to the supreme, where else majority of the hindus regard Maheswar as the supreme(including me)

hence the saying

Guru Bramha, guru vishnu guru devo maheswara

Jimano
25th June 2008, 10:30 AM
Hmm good question, ISKON contradicts with Saivam, it regards Lord Krisna to the supreme, where else majority of the hindus regard Maheswar as the supreme(including me)

hence the saying

Guru Bramha, guru vishnu guru devo maheswara

Iskcon not only contradict with Saivism, it also contradicts with Madva's Vaisnavism.

Madva's like Sri Vaisnavas, accept Sriman Narayana as the Supreme God and Krsna as an incarnation of Vishnu. However, Iskconites claim that Lord Krsna is the "Supreme Personality of Godhead" and Narayana is a secondary form of Krsna. This is based on their concocted Srimad Bhagavata pramana - Krsna stu bhagavan svayam

Raghu
25th June 2008, 01:12 PM
I fully agree with Sudhama sir... no doubt,

but Saivam, is by far the eldest religious culture , i feel the invasion from the greeks, (eastern europeans), esp romes, introduced Vaishnavites to india,(look at the chracter names in mahabartha/ rmayan..etc, they do not sound like typical indian names ) further more, as far as i know, this saivam / vaishnamvam only exists in southern india, esp tamil nadu, andra..etc.

but not in the rest of india, though, the Northern (along nepal border, extending to afghanistan) and north western indian (now pakistan) were mainly Mahadev devotees areas, the bengal side is mainly Kali ma devotees

Raghu
25th June 2008, 01:22 PM
[tscii:53e2e4877d]History of Shaivism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Chola dynasty bronze of Shiva, Nataraja held at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York City Hinduism Portal
This article is about the history of the religion Shaivism. For history of the deity see Shiva.
Shaivism (also spelled "Saivism"), refers to the religious traditions of Hinduism that focus on the deity Shiva.[1]

The worship of Shiva is a pan-Hindu tradition, practiced widely across all of India, Sri Lanka and Nepal.[2][3] Shaivism has many different schools showing both regional variations and differences in philosophy.[4] Shaivism has a vast literature that includes texts representing multiple philosophical schools, including non-dualist (abheda), dualist (bheda), and non-dual-with-dualism (bhedābheda) perspectives.[5]

It is very difficult to determine the early history of Shaivism.[6] Axel Michaels explains the composite nature of Shaivism as follows:

Like Vişņu, Śiva is also a high god, who gives his name to a collection of theistic trends and sects: Śaivism. Like Vaişņavism, the term also implies a unity which cannot be clearly found either in religious practice or in philosophical and esoteric doctrine. Furthermore, practice and doctrine must be kept separate.[7]

Contents [hide]
1 Rudra and Shiva
2 Ancient artifacts
2.1 Pashupati seal
3 Developmental milestones
3.1 Pre-Gupta period
3.2 Gupta period: Puranic Shaivism
3.3 6th-7th century AD
3.4 Adi Shankara's impact
3.5 Saiva Siddhanta
3.6 Nayanars
4 Tamil areas
5 See also
6 Notes
7 References



[edit] Rudra and Shiva
For information on the history of the deity, see the articles for Rudra and Shiva
Shaivism, also known as the Shaiva cult, is devoted to worship of the god Shiva.[8] The Sanskrit word śiva (Devanagari शिव) is an adjective meaning kind, friendly, gracious, or auspicious.[9][10] As a proper name it means "The Auspicious One", used as a euphimistic name for Rudra.[11] In simple English transliteration it is written either as Shiva or Siva.

Over the course of time, many regional cults were amalgamated into the figure of Shiva as we know him today.[12]


[edit] Ancient artifacts
Some people believe that artifacts from Mohenjo-daro, Harappa and other archaeological sites of northwestern India and Pakistan indicate that some early form of Shiva worship was practiced in the Indus Valley. These artifacts include lingams and the "Pashupati seal" that has been the subject of much study. The Indus Valley civilization reached its peak around 2300-2000 BCE, when trade links with Mesopotamia are known to have existed, was in decline by 1800 BCE, and faded away by 1500 BCE.[13]


1008 Lingas carved on a rock surface. Photograph is taken at the shore of the river Tungabhadra, Hampi, India
[edit] Pashupati seal
For more detail on this seal see: Shiva
A seal discovered during excavation of the Mohenjo-daro archaeological site in the Indus Valley has drawn attention as a possible representation of a "proto-Shiva" figure.[14] This "Pashupati" (Lord of Animals, Sanskrit paśupati)[15] seal shows a large central figure that is surrounded by animals. The central figure is often described as a seated figure, possibly ithyphallic, surrounded by animals.[16] Sir John Marshall and others have claimed that this figure is a prototype of Shiva, and have described the figure as having three faces, seated in a "yoga posture" with the knees out and feet joined. Semi-circular shapes on the head are often interpreted as two horns. Gavin Flood characterizes these views as "speculative", saying that while it is not clear from the seal that the figure has three faces, is seated in a yoga posture, or even that the shape is intended to represent a human figure, it is nevertheless possible that there are echoes of Shaiva iconographic themes, such as half-moon shapes resembling the horns of a bull.[17][18]


[edit] Developmental milestones

[edit] Pre-Gupta period
The documentation of formal religious history, as opposed to archaeological evidence or scriptural mentions, is marked by Gavin Flood's remark that:

The formation of Śaiva traditions as we understand them begins to occur during the period from 200 BC to 100 AD.[19]

The two great epics of India, the Mahabharata[20] and the Ramayana, deal extensively with stories of both Shiva and Vishnu,[21] and there are references to early Shiva ascetics in the Mahabharata.[22]

The Śvetāśvatara Upanishad (400 - 200 BCE)[23] is the earliest textual exposition of a systematic philosophy of Shaivism.[24] As explained by Gavin Flood, the text proposes:

... a theology which elevates Rudra to the status of supreme being, the Lord (Sanskrit: Īśa) who is transcendent yet also has cosmological functions, as does Śiva in later traditions.[25]

In the grammarian Patanjali's "Great Commentary" (Sanskrit: Mahābhasya) on Panini's Sanskrit grammar (second century BCE), he describes a devotee of Shiva as clad in animal skins and carrying an iron lance as the symbol of his god, perhaps a precursor of Shiva's trident.[26][27]


[edit] Gupta period: Puranic Shaivism
It is with the Puranas that Shaivism spread rapidly, eventually throughout the subcontinent, through the singers and composers of the Puranic narratives.[28] The Puranic literature developed during the Gupta dynasty (c. 320-500 AD)[29][30] along with Smarta brahmin forms of worship.[31] The convergence of various Shaiva and Vaishnava trends, as well as their growing popularity, may have been partly the outcome of dominant dynasties like the Guptas assimilating the resources and cultural elements of their conquered territories.[32]

The bulk of the material contained in the Puranas was established during the reign of the Guptas, with incremental additions taking place to the texts up to later medieval times.[33] There are eighteen major Puranas, and these are traditionally classified into three groups of six each, with Shiva considered to be the central deity in the Shiva Purana, Linga Purana, Matsya Purana, Kurma purana, Skanda Purana, and Agni Purana.[34] However this traditional grouping is inexact, for while the Shiva Purana is strongly sectarian in its focus on Shiva, others are not so clearly sectarian and include material about other deities as well, particularly Vishnu.[35]

The Puranic corpus is a complex body of materials that advance the views of various competing cults, as Gavin Flood explains:

Although these texts are related to each other, and material in one is found in another, they nevertheless each present a view of ordering of the world from a particular perspective. They must not be seen as random collections of old tales, but as highly selective and crafted expositions and presentations of worldviews and soteriologies, compiled by particular groups of Brahmins to propagate a particular vision, whether it be focused on Viṣṇu, Śiva, or Devī, or, indeed, any number of deities.[36]

For example, the Vishnu Purana (4th century CE) presents a Vaisnava viewpoint in which Vishnu awakens, becomes the creator god Brahma to create the universe, sustains it, and then destroys it as Rudra (Shiva).[37]


[edit] 6th-7th century AD
Shaiva theism was expounded in the Agamas, which number two hundred including the Upagamas (the "Lesser" Agamas), which were composed before the 7th century AD.[38] In the 7th century AD, Banabhatta included the worship of Shiva in his account of the prominent religious sects of that time.[39]

In the 7th century AD the great Chinese traveller Xuanzang (Huen Tsang) toured India and wrote in Chinese about the prevalence of Shiva worship at that time, describing Shiva temples at Kanoj, Karachi, Malwa, Gandhar (Kandahar), and especially at Varanasi (Benares) where he saw twenty large temples dedicated to Shiva.[40]


[edit] Adi Shankara's impact
Smartism is a denomination of Hinduism that places emphasis on a group of five deities rather than just a single deity.[41] The "worship of the five forms" (pacāyatana pūjā) system, which was popularized by the philosopher Adi Shankara (also known as Śaṅkarācārya) (between 650 and 800 AD, traditionally 788 820 CE)[42] among orthodox Brahmins of the Smārta tradition, invokes the five deities Shiva, Ganesha, Vishnu, Devī, and Sūrya.[43][44] This system was instituted by Śaṅkarācārya primarily to unite the principal deities of the five major sects on an equal status.[45] The monistic philosophy preached by Śaṅkarācārya made it possible to choose one of these as a preferred principal deity and at the same time worship the other four deities as different forms of the same all-pervading Brahman.

Shankara's Dig-vijaya mentions six Shaivite sects that were in existence at his time, but their existence in an organized way is not clearly established.[46]


[edit] Saiva Siddhanta
Rishi Tirumular, like his satguru, Maharishi Nandinatha, propounded a monistic theism in which Shiva is both material and efficient cause, immanent and transcendent. Shiva creates souls and world through emanation from Himself, ultimately reabsorbing them in His oceanic Being, as water flows into water, fire into fire, ether into ether.

The Tirumandiram unfolds the way of Siddhanta as a progressive, four-fold path of charya, virtuous and moral living; kriya, temple worship; and yogainternalized worship and union with Parā Shiva through the grace of the living satguruwhich leads to the state of jana and liberation. After liberation, the soul body continues to evolve until it fully merges with Godjva becomes Shiva.

Affirming the monistic view of Shaiva Siddhanta was Srikumara (ca 1056), stating in his commentary, Tatparyadpika, on Bhoja Paramaras works, that Pati, pasu and pasa are ultimately one, and that revelation declares that Shiva is one. He is the essence of everything. Srikumara maintained that Shiva is both the efficient and the material cause of the universe.


A new Siddhanta

It was in the twelfth century that Aghorasiva took up the task of amalgamating the Sanskrit Siddhanta tradition of the North with the Southern, Tamil Siddhanta. As the head of a branch monastery of the mardaka Order in Chidambaram, Aghorasiva gave a unique slant to Shaiva Siddhanta theology, paving the way for a new pluralistic school. In strongly refuting any monist interpretations of Siddhanta, Aghorasiva brought a dramatic change in the understanding of the Godhead by classifying the first five principles, or tattvas (Nada, Bindu, Sadasiva, svara and Suddhavidya), into the category of pasa (bonds), stating they were effects of a cause and inherently unconscious substances. This was clearly a departure from the traditional teaching in which these five were part of the divine nature of God. Aghorasiva thus inaugurated a new Siddhanta, divergent from the original monistic Shaiva Siddhanta of the Himalayas.

Despite Aghorasivas pluralistic viewpoint of Siddhanta, he was successful in preserving the invaluable Sanskritic rituals of the ancient gamic tradition through his writings. To this day, Aghorasivas Siddhanta philosophy is followed by almost all of the hereditary Sivacharya(saiva-brahmins) temple priests, and his paddhati texts on the gamas have become the standard puja manuals. His Kriyakramadyotika is a vast work covering nearly all aspects of Shaiva Siddhanta ritual, including dksha, saskaras, atmartha puja and installation of Deities.


A dualistic development

In the thirteenth century, another important development occurred in Shaiva Siddhanta when Meykandar wrote the twelve-verse Sivajanabodham. This and subsequent works by other writers laid the foundation of the Meykandar Sampradaya, which propounds a pluralistic realism wherein God, souls and world are coexistent and without beginning. Siva is efficient but not material cause. They view the souls merging in Siva as salt in water, an eternal oneness that is also twoness. This schools literature has so dominated scholarship that Shaiva Siddhanta is often erroneously identified as exclusively pluralistic. In truth, there are two interpretations, one monistic and another dualistic, of which the former is the original philosophical premise found in pre-Meykandar scriptures, including the Upanishads.


Saiva Siddhanta Today

Today Shaiva Siddhanta has sixty million[citation needed] Tamil Shaivites in South India mainly in Tamil Nadu and Sri Lanka. (See Hinduism in Sri Lanka) Prominent Siddhanta societies, temples and monasteries also exist in a number of other countries.

There a number of Aadheenams which are involved in maintaining and propagating Shaiva Siddhanta in Tamil Nadu. The most prominent are

1. Dharumai Aadheenam (Dharmapuram) 2. Tiruvaavadudurai Aadheenam (Tiruvaavadudurai) 3. Turupanandal Adheenam (Turupanandal) 4. Madurai Aadheenam (Madurai) and 5. Perur Adheenam (Perur)

These Aadheenams are headed by Acharyas. They are also the hereditary trustees of almost all the Siva/Sakthi/Subramanya temples of Tamil Nadu. The rituals in these temples are conducted as per the Agama Sasthras.

The United States island of Kauai, a part of Hawaii, is home to the Saiva Siddhanta Church, an organization that promotes the union of worldwide Hindus, Shaivites and others, through a publication called Hinduism Today.

This was founded by Maharishi Satguru Sivaya Subramuniyaswami (1927-2001) one of the greatest exponents of Hinduism of this century.


[edit] Nayanars
By the seventh century CE, the Nayanars, a tradition of poet-saints in the bhakti tradition developed in South India with a focus on Shiva by the comparable to that of the Vaisnava Alvars.[47]

Tirumular, also spelled (Tirumūlār or Tirumūlar) the author of the Tirumantiram (also spelled Tirumandiram) is considered by Tattwananda to be the earliest exponent of Shaivism in Tamil areas.[48] Tirumular is dated as 7th or 8th century AD by Maurice Winternitz.[49] The Tirumantiram is a primary source for the system of Shaiva Siddhanta, being the tenth book of its canon.[50]

The devotional poems of the Nayanars are divided into eleven collections together with a Tamil Purana called the Periya Puranam. The first seven collections are known as the Thevaram and are regarded by Tamils as equivalent to the Vedas.[51] They were composed in the 7th century CE by Sambandar, Appar, and Sundarar.[52]

The Tiruvacakam by Manikkavacagar is an important collection of hymns of which Sir Charles Eliot wrote, "In no literature with which I am acquainted, has the individual religious life, its struggles and dejections, its hopes and fears, its confidence and its triumph received a delineation more frank and more profound."[53] The Tiruvacakam praises Siva as belonging to the southern country yet worshipped by people of all countries.[54]
[/tscii:53e2e4877d]

Sudhaama
25th June 2008, 07:59 PM
.
. Truth has many Sides.!

Well. Dear Raghu,

I have a lot to say the Truth on the other side...

...but Not under this Thread on Ramayana...

...OUT OF THE TOPIC concerned.

I wonder why you are dragging this Shaiva-Vaishnava controversy...

..under this irrelevant Thread Ramayana.!!!.???

Religion is the matter of ones own Faith...

...a PRIVATE AFFAIR... allowing Total Freedom for ones own Choice amongst various Options.

There is NO ROOM for Politics....

...in Religion, a Sacred affair related to ones Soul...

...more than the Mind and Wisdom.

Religions are intended for EMANCIPATION of Mankind towards higher Sphere of Human-resource...

...rather UPLIFT OF HUMANITY...

...but NOT FOR DIVISION OF MANKIND... NOR DISPARITIES or controversies...

... or unnecessary problems by INTERFERENCES with others Faiths and Freedom of pursuit

What is the Role of God in ones own Life.?

Why Religion is necessary.? How to approach God towards self-advantage...

..are the Questions... on which everyone has to search and find answers on his/her own...

...even though different from person to person.

In brief God-realisation raises up the Mankind towards higher level

...outside his/her Mundane arena in Life

..rather UPLIFT of Mankind on the whole... through various Options of Soul-pursuits... so called Religions.

...developing UNIVERSAL-LOVE... alongside ones own advancement of Mind and Wisdom application towards the Reality of Life...

...alongside the Truth of God the Almighty.. in relation to the Supreme birth the Mankind...

...the ONLY CREATION endowed with Soul-might also...

...in addition to Physical, Mental and Wisdom Mights.

Lord Rama has demonstrated as a MODEL-MAN......

...by applying this broad Spectrum of God- Theory...

... for ones own advancement in Life.!!!


[tscii:6ecd88fc7f]History of Shaivism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Chola dynasty bronze of Shiva, Nataraja held at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York City Hinduism Portal
This article is about the history of the religion Shaivism. For history of the deity see Shiva.
Shaivism (also spelled "Saivism"), refers to the religious traditions of Hinduism that focus on the deity Shiva.[1]

The worship of Shiva is a pan-Hindu tradition, practiced widely across all of India, Sri Lanka and Nepal.[2][3] Shaivism has many different schools showing both regional variations and differences in philosophy.[4] Shaivism has a vast literature that includes texts representing multiple philosophical schools, including non-dualist (abheda), dualist (bheda), and non-dual-with-dualism (bhedābheda) perspectives.[5]

It is very difficult to determine the early history of Shaivism.[6] Axel Michaels explains the composite nature of Shaivism as follows:

Like Vişņu, Śiva is also a high god, who gives his name to a collection of theistic trends and sects: Śaivism. Like Vaişņavism, the term also implies a unity which cannot be clearly found either in religious practice or in philosophical and esoteric doctrine. Furthermore, practice and doctrine must be kept separate.[7]

Contents [hide]
1 Rudra and Shiva
2 Ancient artifacts
2.1 Pashupati seal
3 Developmental milestones
3.1 Pre-Gupta period
3.2 Gupta period: Puranic Shaivism
3.3 6th-7th century AD
3.4 Adi Shankara's impact
3.5 Saiva Siddhanta
3.6 Nayanars
4 Tamil areas
5 See also
6 Notes
7 References



[edit] Rudra and Shiva
For information on the history of the deity, see the articles for Rudra and Shiva
Shaivism, also known as the Shaiva cult, is devoted to worship of the god Shiva.[8] The Sanskrit word śiva (Devanagari शिव) is an adjective meaning kind, friendly, gracious, or auspicious.[9][10] As a proper name it means "The Auspicious One", used as a euphimistic name for Rudra.[11] In simple English transliteration it is written either as Shiva or Siva.

Over the course of time, many regional cults were amalgamated into the figure of Shiva as we know him today.[12]


[edit] Ancient artifacts
Some people believe that artifacts from Mohenjo-daro, Harappa and other archaeological sites of northwestern India and Pakistan indicate that some early form of Shiva worship was practiced in the Indus Valley. These artifacts include lingams and the "Pashupati seal" that has been the subject of much study. The Indus Valley civilization reached its peak around 2300-2000 BCE, when trade links with Mesopotamia are known to have existed, was in decline by 1800 BCE, and faded away by 1500 BCE.[13]


1008 Lingas carved on a rock surface. Photograph is taken at the shore of the river Tungabhadra, Hampi, India
[edit] Pashupati seal
For more detail on this seal see: Shiva
A seal discovered during excavation of the Mohenjo-daro archaeological site in the Indus Valley has drawn attention as a possible representation of a "proto-Shiva" figure.[14] This "Pashupati" (Lord of Animals, Sanskrit paśupati)[15] seal shows a large central figure that is surrounded by animals. The central figure is often described as a seated figure, possibly ithyphallic, surrounded by animals.[16] Sir John Marshall and others have claimed that this figure is a prototype of Shiva, and have described the figure as having three faces, seated in a "yoga posture" with the knees out and feet joined. Semi-circular shapes on the head are often interpreted as two horns. Gavin Flood characterizes these views as "speculative", saying that while it is not clear from the seal that the figure has three faces, is seated in a yoga posture, or even that the shape is intended to represent a human figure, it is nevertheless possible that there are echoes of Shaiva iconographic themes, such as half-moon shapes resembling the horns of a bull.[17][18]


[edit] Developmental milestones

[edit] Pre-Gupta period
The documentation of formal religious history, as opposed to archaeological evidence or scriptural mentions, is marked by Gavin Flood's remark that:

The formation of Śaiva traditions as we understand them begins to occur during the period from 200 BC to 100 AD.[19]

The two great epics of India, the Mahabharata[20] and the Ramayana, deal extensively with stories of both Shiva and Vishnu,[21] and there are references to early Shiva ascetics in the Mahabharata.[22]

The Śvetāśvatara Upanishad (400 - 200 BCE)[23] is the earliest textual exposition of a systematic philosophy of Shaivism.[24] As explained by Gavin Flood, the text proposes:

... a theology which elevates Rudra to the status of supreme being, the Lord (Sanskrit: Īśa) who is transcendent yet also has cosmological functions, as does Śiva in later traditions.[25]

In the grammarian Patanjali's "Great Commentary" (Sanskrit: Mahābhasya) on Panini's Sanskrit grammar (second century BCE), he describes a devotee of Shiva as clad in animal skins and carrying an iron lance as the symbol of his god, perhaps a precursor of Shiva's trident.[26][27]


[edit] Gupta period: Puranic Shaivism
It is with the Puranas that Shaivism spread rapidly, eventually throughout the subcontinent, through the singers and composers of the Puranic narratives.[28] The Puranic literature developed during the Gupta dynasty (c. 320-500 AD)[29][30] along with Smarta brahmin forms of worship.[31] The convergence of various Shaiva and Vaishnava trends, as well as their growing popularity, may have been partly the outcome of dominant dynasties like the Guptas assimilating the resources and cultural elements of their conquered territories.[32]

The bulk of the material contained in the Puranas was established during the reign of the Guptas, with incremental additions taking place to the texts up to later medieval times.[33] There are eighteen major Puranas, and these are traditionally classified into three groups of six each, with Shiva considered to be the central deity in the Shiva Purana, Linga Purana, Matsya Purana, Kurma purana, Skanda Purana, and Agni Purana.[34] However this traditional grouping is inexact, for while the Shiva Purana is strongly sectarian in its focus on Shiva, others are not so clearly sectarian and include material about other deities as well, particularly Vishnu.[35]

The Puranic corpus is a complex body of materials that advance the views of various competing cults, as Gavin Flood explains:

Although these texts are related to each other, and material in one is found in another, they nevertheless each present a view of ordering of the world from a particular perspective. They must not be seen as random collections of old tales, but as highly selective and crafted expositions and presentations of worldviews and soteriologies, compiled by particular groups of Brahmins to propagate a particular vision, whether it be focused on Viṣṇu, Śiva, or Devī, or, indeed, any number of deities.[36]

For example, the Vishnu Purana (4th century CE) presents a Vaisnava viewpoint in which Vishnu awakens, becomes the creator god Brahma to create the universe, sustains it, and then destroys it as Rudra (Shiva).[37]


[edit] 6th-7th century AD
Shaiva theism was expounded in the Agamas, which number two hundred including the Upagamas (the "Lesser" Agamas), which were composed before the 7th century AD.[38] In the 7th century AD, Banabhatta included the worship of Shiva in his account of the prominent religious sects of that time.[39]

In the 7th century AD the great Chinese traveller Xuanzang (Huen Tsang) toured India and wrote in Chinese about the prevalence of Shiva worship at that time, describing Shiva temples at Kanoj, Karachi, Malwa, Gandhar (Kandahar), and especially at Varanasi (Benares) where he saw twenty large temples dedicated to Shiva.[40]


[edit] Adi Shankara's impact
Smartism is a denomination of Hinduism that places emphasis on a group of five deities rather than just a single deity.[41] The "worship of the five forms" (pacāyatana pūjā) system, which was popularized by the philosopher Adi Shankara (also known as Śaṅkarācārya) (between 650 and 800 AD, traditionally 788 820 CE)[42] among orthodox Brahmins of the Smārta tradition, invokes the five deities Shiva, Ganesha, Vishnu, Devī, and Sūrya.[43][44] This system was instituted by Śaṅkarācārya primarily to unite the principal deities of the five major sects on an equal status.[45] The monistic philosophy preached by Śaṅkarācārya made it possible to choose one of these as a preferred principal deity and at the same time worship the other four deities as different forms of the same all-pervading Brahman.

Shankara's Dig-vijaya mentions six Shaivite sects that were in existence at his time, but their existence in an organized way is not clearly established.[46]


[edit] Saiva Siddhanta
Rishi Tirumular, like his satguru, Maharishi Nandinatha, propounded a monistic theism in which Shiva is both material and efficient cause, immanent and transcendent. Shiva creates souls and world through emanation from Himself, ultimately reabsorbing them in His oceanic Being, as water flows into water, fire into fire, ether into ether.

The Tirumandiram unfolds the way of Siddhanta as a progressive, four-fold path of charya, virtuous and moral living; kriya, temple worship; and yogainternalized worship and union with Parā Shiva through the grace of the living satguruwhich leads to the state of jana and liberation. After liberation, the soul body continues to evolve until it fully merges with Godjva becomes Shiva.

Affirming the monistic view of Shaiva Siddhanta was Srikumara (ca 1056), stating in his commentary, Tatparyadpika, on Bhoja Paramaras works, that Pati, pasu and pasa are ultimately one, and that revelation declares that Shiva is one. He is the essence of everything. Srikumara maintained that Shiva is both the efficient and the material cause of the universe.


A new Siddhanta

It was in the twelfth century that Aghorasiva took up the task of amalgamating the Sanskrit Siddhanta tradition of the North with the Southern, Tamil Siddhanta. As the head of a branch monastery of the mardaka Order in Chidambaram, Aghorasiva gave a unique slant to Shaiva Siddhanta theology, paving the way for a new pluralistic school. In strongly refuting any monist interpretations of Siddhanta, Aghorasiva brought a dramatic change in the understanding of the Godhead by classifying the first five principles, or tattvas (Nada, Bindu, Sadasiva, svara and Suddhavidya), into the category of pasa (bonds), stating they were effects of a cause and inherently unconscious substances. This was clearly a departure from the traditional teaching in which these five were part of the divine nature of God. Aghorasiva thus inaugurated a new Siddhanta, divergent from the original monistic Shaiva Siddhanta of the Himalayas.

Despite Aghorasivas pluralistic viewpoint of Siddhanta, he was successful in preserving the invaluable Sanskritic rituals of the ancient gamic tradition through his writings. To this day, Aghorasivas Siddhanta philosophy is followed by almost all of the hereditary Sivacharya(saiva-brahmins) temple priests, and his paddhati texts on the gamas have become the standard puja manuals. His Kriyakramadyotika is a vast work covering nearly all aspects of Shaiva Siddhanta ritual, including dksha, saskaras, atmartha puja and installation of Deities.


A dualistic development

In the thirteenth century, another important development occurred in Shaiva Siddhanta when Meykandar wrote the twelve-verse Sivajanabodham. This and subsequent works by other writers laid the foundation of the Meykandar Sampradaya, which propounds a pluralistic realism wherein God, souls and world are coexistent and without beginning. Siva is efficient but not material cause. They view the souls merging in Siva as salt in water, an eternal oneness that is also twoness. This schools literature has so dominated scholarship that Shaiva Siddhanta is often erroneously identified as exclusively pluralistic. In truth, there are two interpretations, one monistic and another dualistic, of which the former is the original philosophical premise found in pre-Meykandar scriptures, including the Upanishads.


Saiva Siddhanta Today

Today Shaiva Siddhanta has sixty million[citation needed] Tamil Shaivites in South India mainly in Tamil Nadu and Sri Lanka. (See Hinduism in Sri Lanka) Prominent Siddhanta societies, temples and monasteries also exist in a number of other countries.

There a number of Aadheenams which are involved in maintaining and propagating Shaiva Siddhanta in Tamil Nadu. The most prominent are

1. Dharumai Aadheenam (Dharmapuram) 2. Tiruvaavadudurai Aadheenam (Tiruvaavadudurai) 3. Turupanandal Adheenam (Turupanandal) 4. Madurai Aadheenam (Madurai) and 5. Perur Adheenam (Perur)

These Aadheenams are headed by Acharyas. They are also the hereditary trustees of almost all the Siva/Sakthi/Subramanya temples of Tamil Nadu. The rituals in these temples are conducted as per the Agama Sasthras.

The United States island of Kauai, a part of Hawaii, is home to the Saiva Siddhanta Church, an organization that promotes the union of worldwide Hindus, Shaivites and others, through a publication called Hinduism Today.

This was founded by Maharishi Satguru Sivaya Subramuniyaswami (1927-2001) one of the greatest exponents of Hinduism of this century.


[edit] Nayanars
By the seventh century CE, the Nayanars, a tradition of poet-saints in the bhakti tradition developed in South India with a focus on Shiva by the comparable to that of the Vaisnava Alvars.[47]

Tirumular, also spelled (Tirumūlār or Tirumūlar) the author of the Tirumantiram (also spelled Tirumandiram) is considered by Tattwananda to be the earliest exponent of Shaivism in Tamil areas.[48] Tirumular is dated as 7th or 8th century AD by Maurice Winternitz.[49] The Tirumantiram is a primary source for the system of Shaiva Siddhanta, being the tenth book of its canon.[50]

The devotional poems of the Nayanars are divided into eleven collections together with a Tamil Purana called the Periya Puranam. The first seven collections are known as the Thevaram and are regarded by Tamils as equivalent to the Vedas.[51] They were composed in the 7th century CE by Sambandar, Appar, and Sundarar.[52]

The Tiruvacakam by Manikkavacagar is an important collection of hymns of which Sir Charles Eliot wrote, "In no literature with which I am acquainted, has the individual religious life, its struggles and dejections, its hopes and fears, its confidence and its triumph received a delineation more frank and more profound."[53] The Tiruvacakam praises Siva as belonging to the southern country yet worshipped by people of all countries.[54]
[/tscii:6ecd88fc7f]

podalangai
25th June 2008, 10:10 PM
History of Shaivism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Wikipedia? Until around a year ago, Wikipedia used to claim that most scholars dated the Tolkappiyam to the 9th or 10th century AD (thanks to the efforts of a dilligent group of Kannadiga partisans). Would you also believe that? It's an extremely unreliable source of information on most topics connected with India.

Anyway, on the substance of your post, I'd say it's better not to get into a Saivam-Vainavam debate here. Sectarianism within Hinduism is an ugly thing, and orthodox Vaishnavite views on the provenance of Shaivism, if repeated here, would probably injure the feelings of a good many readers (as would the opposite).

Badri
26th June 2008, 05:25 AM
I agree with Podalangai. This constant Shiva better than Vishnu and Vishnu older than Shiva debate is one of the banes of Hinduism. You'd expect at least 21st century Indians and people of Indian origin to have better sense than to continue this debate.

Sudhamaa said it beautifully " Periappa's Children are NOT GREATER ... NOR SUPERIOR ......than the Chiththappa's children.!"

:clap:

CLUELESS
7th August 2008, 06:30 AM
Dear Hubbers,
I started this discussion to know more about Rama & Vali arguments.
But what I read is out of context.
May we please return to the main topic?

Raghu
15th August 2008, 02:58 PM
RamAnand Saagar recent Ramayan on NDT-IMAGINE channel is really pathetic, too much graphics, got all the stories messed up, contradict with previous versions and it just looks like another BOLLYWOOD movie!

CLUELESS
15th August 2008, 05:06 PM
The Ramayana and other epics shown on the TV make pathetic viewing. They emphasise on visual graphics and gaudy costumes/make-up, ignoring the richness of philosophy and morals behind every episode.
Surely, such TV serials are meant for the masses with blind faith and limited knowledge,who consider it as a routine "good versus bad" story, to be seen as a movie or as a cartoon.
The producers should venture into this area, with the idea of presenting an opus where funds are not a limiting factor. They should take a leaf from the makers of TEN COMMANDMENTS and BENHUR.
The narrations/dialogues should be in plain simple language which will not be difficult for the viewers to comprehend.
Most of the serials quote Sanskritised terms ver batim, and the characters address each other with flamboyant honorific titles which greatly waters down the philosophies propounded by the great epic. Such appellatives have to be avoided in the episodes.
The epic Ramayana is more a description and meeting of various characters, as opposed to a chain of free and logical unfolding of a story. It should make the viewers to easily identify themselves with the characters.
Further, the characters like Rama, Lakshmana, Sita and others are projected as 'caricatured' by artists in the distant past. They should be depicted as normal human beings with features representing the temperament as told in the original versions.

Raghu
15th August 2008, 05:29 PM
Further, the characters like Rama, Lakshmana, Sita and others are projected as 'caricatured' by artists in the distant past. They should be depicted as normal human beings with features representing the temperament as told in the original versions.

Correct, this is what i was trying to explain, this is very evident in the latest(2007) version of Ramayana, here Rama is shown as Supernatural (GOD) in one episode and a Human in another episode, esp there was a scene where Rama Acknowledge 'Maheshwar' through his 'special vision' and shows human emotions , such as despair, anger, sad, frustration when sita is kidnapped, surely if one has special vision to see 'Maheshwar' or ' see the future' surely he must be able to see who kidnapped sita, where she was taken etc etc... no logics in the latest version, it is all makeup, computer graphics and contradicting issues and views

Sudhama sir

What are your views on this ???

Sudhaama
15th August 2008, 07:29 PM
.
. Salient Message of Ramayana to Humanity.!!!
.



Further, the characters like Rama, Lakshmana, Sita and others are projected as 'caricatured' by artists in the distant past. They should be depicted as normal human beings with features representing the temperament as told in the original versions.

Correct, this is what i was trying to explain, this is very evident in the latest(2007) version of Ramayana, here Rama is shown as Supernatural (GOD) in one episode and a Human in another episode, esp there was a scene where Rama Acknowledge 'Maheshwar' through his 'special vision' and shows human emotions , such as despair, anger, sad, frustration when sita is kidnapped, surely if one has special vision to see 'Maheshwar' or ' see the future' surely he must be able to see who kidnapped sita, where she was taken etc etc... no logics in the latest version, it is all makeup, computer graphics and contradicting issues and views

Sudhama sir

What are your views on this ???

My Dear Raghu,

Because You have specifically addressed me... I duly honour your wish and expectation from me and reply herebelow...

...Otherwise I am NOT INTERESTED to enter into Shiva-Vishnu Controversies... every now and then...

...under irrelevant contexts... of the Topic you have well-started and conducting it alive and enthusiastic so far.

In brief... I request you to confine to the Topic as per the Title Ramayana... without diversions or side-tracking anymore.

There are various Ramayanas written by different Authors... all over India and abroad too... contradicting each other too.!

We will become mad... if we start applying our Thoughts towards such disparities.

So we should confine our Thoughts to the Moola-Text of Ramayana by Valmiki... which alone is AUTHENTIC... as well as SACRED...

...and called as the India ITHIHASA... which word means..."It happened so."

One Irking point I must clarify... on your Shiva-Maheshwar faith...

...conforming to VEDIC PRINCIPLES clearly and commonly laid down.

Well I am happy to know of your intimate faith and staunch belief on the Great Lord Shiva... One of the Vedic Gods.

Because you are radically convinced on the purpose of God-faith and conduct... as a Saivite. Well, You can continue so.

But let us not indulge in the Thoughts... as who is Supreme.? Shiva or Vishnu.?

If You believe Shiva is the Parameshwar more than Vishnu... well, you can continue to have such a state God-faith...

..rather as your PRIVATE BELIEF... on which others have no Moral right to dispute... because it is entirely personal.

Nothing wrong in it.

But please do not try to make others to fall in line with your personal faith.

Because Vedic Doctrines... have laid down Seven sorts of devotion... towards one Common Vedic God...

..and each devotee has to choose and decide by his own preferencial consideration based on ones own practical experience of return in life... in reciprocation to devotion towards the God-form and pursuit as per his/her individual choice.

How and Why.?

I can very well claim, declare and boast to others... that my Mother is Great.! My Mother-land is Great... My profession is Great.!!

..but can I say... my dear Raghu, Your Mother is Not Great... or at least to the degree of my Mother.?

..Because I do not know your Mother... NOR CONCERNED.

And Can I say Malaysia is Not Great nor any other Country than my land India.?

No. because I am NOT CONCERNED with other Nations... nor had an opportunity to be served as much as my Motherland India.

So is the case of any aspect of Personal belief, Faith and attachement... applicable to anybody in the World.

Vedic doctrines are highly Optimistic, Large-hearted and Generous towards the Mosaic form of Global Humanity...

..Thus everyone of the devotees has the right one choice... apt to his Soul-propensities.

So we should be satisfied on our individual conclusion and devote our mind towards the broad spectrum of Vedic spirit...

...in a Common forum like this... without vivi-sectioning or confining to tiny pocket-thoughts.

In brief the Goal of Vedas... stressed in Ramayana... is to UPLIFT the Humanity on the whole...

...and NOT TO DIVIDE... nor create animosity nor killing the purpose of God-faith and devotion...

..So to say... the Mankind is the SUPREME BIRTH on Earth...and so he should not follow the Animal-life...

..but make use of high Wisdom towards higher perspective of Global Humanity... and Unity in Diversity...

..which sort of devotion and Mind-culture alone will lead him/her towards higher grade of Soul-Might...

..which is vital to get the access with God the Supreme Power...

... as also gain His benign grace... for Success, Prosperity and Happiness.. basically and further towards the Bliss.

Such a divine Message has been enacted by a Drama of Lord Rama..

...at each and every move and stage of the Story...

...categorically depicting the Hero Rama... as the Emulative Mankind... of UNIVERSAL-LOVE...

...exemplary to the Posterity of GLOBAL HUMANITY.!!!.
.

CLUELESS
15th August 2008, 07:44 PM
(1) the points mentioned above are well taken.
let each one think of god as they know him.

(2) i am again coming back to the main point of discussion, :arrow: i.e. the dialogue between rama and vali during vali's dying moments.

Raghu
15th August 2008, 08:46 PM
Sudhama sir,

I beg to differ, I am not arguing who is better god, that is childishm, I have my views just like everyones views, i just expressed, sorry if i have hurt any one.

but please answer this

Why in Some places Rama is described as Mankind and a GOD in other places in Ramayanam???

I can understand Krishna was regarded as GOD in Mahabhartha, but here in Ramyana raama is regarded as an 'Ordinary Human being' so surely he can not have supernatural powers?

Remember Lord Bhrama's boon to ravana was that no body (God, demons, animal..etc) can not kill him, Ravana due to his ARROGANCE regarded human the weakest, hence Human was not involved in the boon . This was the reason for Lord Vishnu to incarnate as raama as an 'Ordinary Human Being ' to slay Ravana

So Rama was prince a normal noble human being, but he is shown as god in some circumstances and a human in other, hence there is no logic in this,

pls correct my ignorance , if any

CLUELESS
15th August 2008, 09:08 PM
i wish to withdraw from this discussions.
thanks.

Raghu
15th August 2008, 09:31 PM
Clueless

I cant remember the dialogues, if i do, i will surely put it here

Sudhaama
15th August 2008, 11:14 PM
Sudhama sir,

I beg to differ, I am not arguing who is better god, that is childishm, I have my views just like everyones views, i just expressed, sorry if i have hurt any one.

but please answer this

Why in Some places Rama is described as Mankind and a GOD in other places in Ramayanam???

I can understand Krishna was regarded as GOD in Mahabhartha, but here in Ramyana raama is regarded as an 'Ordinary Human being' so surely he can not have supernatural powers?

Remember Lord Bhrama's boon to ravana was that no body (God, demons, animal..etc) can not kill him, Ravana due to his ARROGANCE regarded human the weakest, hence Human was not involved in the boon . This was the reason for Lord Vishnu to incarnate as raama as an 'Ordinary Human Being ' to slay Ravana

So Rama was prince a normal noble human being, but he is shown as god in some circumstances and a human in other, hence there is no logic in this,

pls correct my ignorance , if any

Very Good point... all have to remember.

Yes... According to Valmiki... Rama declares openly...

...Aathmaanaam maanusham manyae... meaning, "Among the Creations I am a HUMAN-BEING"

And so he exhibits the normal basic Manly feelings... generally.

...including Desires, Disappointment, Weaping, Lamenting, Anger etc.

In no other Awathara... any God has openly WEPT...

...except Rama Awathara... a clear proof of weakness of Mankind.

And Rama demonstrates by action... by subjecting Himself along with His emulative Wife, Seetha...

...what are the main causes of Human-Suffering.?

There are Six causes... the most important, prominent.. are the Two..

..Anger and Avariciousness.

The whole Ramayana episode is built on these TWO HIDDEN ENEMIES ... as detrimental Inner qualities.

If we analyse the characters which caused the miseries to others and themselves...

..be it Dasaratha, Kaikeyi, Mandara, Vali, Soorpanaka, Ravana and so on.

Even the Hero and Heroine are not the exception.

Main content of the whole misery picks up fast... from the AVARICIOUSNESS / GREED of Seetha...

... to secure the unusual Illusory Deer... for Herself... who is NOT QUALIFIED to aspire for anything...

...since leading the Saintly-Life of Celibacy... secluded away from the regions of Human-inhabitancy of Towns and Villages...

... but forced to live in the Forest... amongst the Animals and such other Sub-Humans.

This is the Major Failure.. and Crux of the whole Ramayana...

..followed by Rama's blunder... in losing temper, got angry and killed the Deer...

...which was not His purpose of chasing...

...besides that Deer had done no harm to Rama, to justify fatal attack by an arrow.

If Seetha would not have been GREEDY... and if Rama would not have UNNECESSARILY become angry...

...there would not have been any suffering for the couple.

Similarly, there are many.

Valmiki clearly depicts Rama as a Man... but a GREAT MAN of Noble Qualities...

...iinnate with IDEAL HUMAN CHARACTER... rather an Exemplary Man.. emulative to Mankind to confront all sorts of Ups and Downs...

..coupled with the Onslaughts of Fate ... so called God's plan.

Thus has imparted a Lesson to Mankind as well as a Silent Message...

"Oh Man.. look at our experiences... POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE...!!!

...when we performed in the right Dharmic path... we were glorified and all of us could be happy.

..Contrarily... when anyone or more of us have burnt our fingers... that eventual fire...

...affect all the persons as INNOCENT VICTIMS.

So my dear Human-brethren... learn Life from our Lesson.. do not unduly suffer like us....

...Never lose control of yourselves by being subjected to be OVERPOWERED by your Inner Enemies... Six bad propensities

...especially GREED AND ANGER.!!
.

CLUELESS
16th August 2008, 07:37 AM
excellent interpretation.

CLUELESS
16th August 2008, 09:15 AM
Clueless

I cant remember the dialogues, if i do, i will surely put it here

dear raghu,
i did not mean the dialogues.
i meant the points raised by vali, and which were answered by rama.

Sudhaama
16th August 2008, 07:19 PM
.
All CLUELESSes can have Human-CLUES here.Welcome.!



Clueless

I cant remember the dialogues, if i do, i will surely put it here

dear raghu,
i did not mean the dialogues.
i meant the points raised by vali, and which were answered by rama.

Dear CLUELESS... I whole-heartedly appreciate your curiosity on one particular point of COMMON-CONCERN...

...applicable to any Human.

And so I am sincerely interested to answer your Questions and Clarify on your doubts.

...May be... perhaps you are now.. CLUELESS.!.?... on this one of the MOST IMPORTANT part of Ramayana...

...provided as a highly VALID LESSON for Humanity on the whole ETERNALLY...

...irrespective of Religion, Nationality or some such Man-made divisions of One Supreme-Birth on Earth.

But you have already been answered... under this Thread earlier... elaborately by arguments and counter-statements by many of us...

...including my friend, the Tamil-Scholar Mr Hari-Krishnan, the learned Author on this subject... both of Valmiki and Kamban

I too had participated in it... quite actively.

Such a lively debate... raises and answers all the probable and possible questions from anybody by the variety of Wisdom.

I wish you and such others... who are sincere and eager to appease their Common-Curiosity... must read and understand that sensible discussion.

Mr Badri the Moderator, Mr Raghu, myself and others.. are repeatedly suggesting you to refer such relevant pages already covering your question...

...but I am unable to understand.. why you are ignoring our suggestion in YOUR INTERESTS...

...of appeasing your Thirst for Knowledge.

So I reiterate... please search the past relevent pages...

...[as we search a Dictionary to get a meaning of a word]...

I am sure you will be glad to go through... since you can find it INTERESTING for any wise man.

And then quote any part of such postings... raising your further questions and doubts as you may feel relevent and necessary.

We all are prepared to reply and extend our discussions further...

... on that interesting and important Moral-Lesson for Mankind.

Yes my dear CLUELESS... somehow you will get the CLUES...

...I am with You.!
.

CLUELESS
17th August 2008, 07:56 AM
dear sudhaama,
thanks for the tips and the support.
let me scan the 'dictionary' and revert.
regards
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
i went thru each of the 33 pages.
mr harikrishna refers to his link in <chennaionline>.
but unfortunately their "services are not available"'
.
what to do ?????

Raghu
18th August 2008, 01:55 PM
[tscii:69b31177e8]


Sudhama sir,

I beg to differ, I am not arguing who is better god that is childish, I have my views just like everyones views, I just expressed, sorry if I have hurt anyone.

But please answer this

Why in Some places Rama is described as Mankind and a GOD in other places in Ramayana???

I can understand Krishna was regarded as GOD in Mahabharata, but here in Ramayana raama is regarded as an 'Ordinary Human being' so surely he cannot have supernatural powers?

Remember Lord Bhrama's boon to ravana was that no body (God, demons, animal..etc) can not kill him, Ravana due to his ARROGANCE regarded human the weakest, hence Human was not involved in the boon . This was the reason for Lord Vishnu to incarnate as raama as an 'Ordinary Human Being ' to slay Ravana

So Rama was prince a normal noble human being, but he is shown as god in some circumstances and a human in other, hence there is no logic in this,

pls correct my ignorance , if any

Very Good point... all have to remember.

Yes... According to Valmiki... Rama declares openly...

...Aathmaanaam maanusham manyae... meaning, "Among the Creations I am a HUMAN-BEING"

And so he exhibits the normal basic Manly feelings... generally.

...including Desires, Disappointment, Weaping, Lamenting, Anger etc.

In no other Awathara... any God has openly WEPT...

...except Rama Awathara... a clear proof of weakness of Mankind.

And Rama demonstrates by action... by subjecting Himself along with His emulative Wife, Seetha...

...what are the main causes of Human-Suffering.?

There are Six causes... the most important, prominent.. are the Two..

..Anger and Avariciousness.

The whole Ramayana episode is built on these TWO HIDDEN ENEMIES ... as detrimental Inner qualities.

If we analyse the characters which caused the miseries to others and themselves...

..be it Dasaratha, Kaikeyi, Mandara, Vali, Soorpanaka, Ravana and so on.

Even the Hero and Heroine are not the exception.

Main content of the whole misery picks up fast... from the AVARICIOUSNESS / GREED of Seetha...

... to secure the unusual Illusory Deer... for Herself... who is NOT QUALIFIED to aspire for anything...

...since leading the Saintly-Life of Celibacy... secluded away from the regions of Human-inhabitancy of Towns and Villages...

... but forced to live in the Forest... amongst the Animals and such other Sub-Humans.

This is the Major Failure.. and Crux of the whole Ramayana...

..followed by Rama's blunder... in losing temper, got angry and killed the Deer...

...which was not His purpose of chasing...

...besides that Deer had done no harm to Rama, to justify fatal attack by an arrow.

If Seetha would not have been GREEDY... and if Rama would not have UNNECESSARILY become angry...

...there would not have been any suffering for the couple.

Similarly, there are many.

Valmiki clearly depicts Rama as a Man... but a GREAT MAN of Noble Qualities...

...iinnate with IDEAL HUMAN CHARACTER... rather an Exemplary Man.. emulative to Mankind to confront all sorts of Ups and Downs...

..coupled with the Onslaughts of Fate ... so called God's plan.

Thus has imparted a Lesson to Mankind as well as a Silent Message...

"Oh Man.. look at our experiences... POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE...!!!

...when we performed in the right Dharmic path... we were glorified and all of us could be happy.

..Contrarily... when anyone or more of us have burnt our fingers... that eventual fire...

...affect all the persons as INNOCENT VICTIMS.

So my dear Human-brethren... learn Life from our Lesson.. do not unduly suffer like us....

...Never lose control of yourselves by being subjected to be OVERPOWERED by your Inner Enemies... Six bad propensities

...especially GREED AND ANGER.!!
.


Dear sudhama sir,

Unfortunatley during my generation, we learn a hell of a lot from media, I have migrated to uk in the late 80's , hence I missed out on all religious teachings about hindusim, it is with my own eager and greed , I try to learn all of these, so please pardon me if I show any ignorance in any of these mythical topics.

but I feel Ramayana, Mahabhratham have all lost its authenticity thanks to all these cartoons we see in the TV, I am very much upset about this as characters in the epics are portrayed in contradicting way than the original scriptures of the epic!, hence misleading the community and esp. the younger generation!
[/tscii:69b31177e8]

Sudhaama
2nd September 2008, 05:59 AM
.


...............but I feel Ramayana, Mahabhratham have all lost its authenticity thanks to all these cartoons we see in the TV, I am very much upset about this as characters in the epics are portrayed in contradicting way than the original scriptures of the epic!, hence misleading the community and esp. the younger generation!


While Rama and Seetha were highly and widely accepted and worshipped as God and Godess...

..not only all over India... but all over Asia as well... wherever Hinduism had spread.

But the subsequent generations could not digest the thought that even the God and the Godess too suffered like Mankind...

..then how can they deserve to be called and qualified as the Super-human.?...

...people started questioning on the Original story of truth of Valmiki

Besides the Kings felt the Ramayana as the Model-document... to force people to honour the King and Elders.

And they also felt the necessity of the story in their local languages enabling the children to be taught in schools.

Eventually the Kings encouraged new Ramayanas in local languages... as well as in the so called Deva-basha, Sanskrit.

...depicting the Hero King of Ramayana as God.

Thus several Ramayanas cropped up... most of them far different... as also mutually contradicting each other too.!

All such Ramayanas highly glorifies Rama and Seetha... some of them even extols Ravana as Great...

One such Ramayana glorifies Ravana so highly that

..Ravana was the Father of Seetha.!
.

Janar
6th September 2008, 08:16 PM
And ya in such stories, Ravana and Sita will never know about this..

..kamba ramayanam is clearly one of the sweetest work of the ramayana...valmiki covers all aspects of rama's story in a frank, blunt manner..kambar focuses only on rama's good, representing Him to be truly God...two different perspectives on the same character..kamba ramayanam is more appropriate for bhakti though, where in contrast, valmiki's ramayana toches on topics controversial.

Janar
6th September 2008, 08:24 PM
A story:

Ravana wished to approach Sita but she rejected him of course. Ravana's chief wife Mandodari suggested that he should disguise himself as Rama.

" When I am disguised as Ram, Ram's mentality of eka patni vrta (one man to one woman) permeates through my mind!"
and so he will never embrace women who are not his wives..

So Ravana can never touch Sita, in Rama's form

Such is the greatness of His (accurate) form!

Raghu
26th September 2008, 09:24 PM
I was watching the latest misleading cartoon by RamAnandSagar again, this time this was hilarious :rotfl2:

here the joker decsribes hanuman to be an avatar of Maheshwar
:rotfl2: :rotfl2:

I am going to make my own ramayan, now every one can make such a mockery of the great epic, no wonder , Non-Hindus can ever understand hinduism thanks to various jokers who make money in the name of epics

:evil: :twisted:

Sudhaama
26th September 2008, 11:46 PM
.
. Hanuman.. the Awathara of Lord Siva... in Ramayana?


I was watching the latest misleading cartoon by RamAnandSagar again, this time this was hilarious :rotfl2:

here the joker decsribes hanuman to be an avatar of Maheshwar
....


Yes. Some of the authentic 18 Puranas say so... that Hanuman is the Awathara of Lord Siva...

...Combined with the aspect of Vayu, His father... thus qualified to be named as Vayu-puthra also

..And in one of the Keerthanas... Swami Thyagaraja, the Awathara of Valmiki... also confirms this fact.

If we keenly study Ramayana... we can wonder whether Ramayana is the epic to praise the Glory of Rama the Hero...

... or on Hanuman his Ambassador....

...similar to Lord Krishna, the Ambassador... whose Glory is highly extolled in Mahabharatha... although he is Not the Hero of the epic...

..but only a Secondary Character..

..Not even Second-Hero.!

So We can justify to change the name of Ramayana...

...as Hanumanaayana...!!!

Yes... without Hanuman... there can be No Ramayana.

Ramayana is not only the Awathara-story of Vishnu.. but also many other Gods...

...including the Lord Siva, Indra, and so on.

Hanuman is the ONE AND THE ONLY CHARACTER... in the whole epic...

...who has never yielded to Earthly onslaughts...

...nor buckled under the cunning Machinations of the enemies or the evil characters...

...nor subdued to Human-weaknesses.

...and always the UNFAILING VICTOR... UNPARALLEL.!...

..Never faced any Failure nor Defeat... even in the least... anywhere.!

Rather the only character in Ramayana... who exhibited WHOLLY the Godly propensities on Earth..

..although showing as just a SUB-HUMAN... a WEAK-LOOKING ANIMAL... so called Monkey....

...is only Hanuman.

... quite opposite inwardly... contrary to His simple and Humble attitudes outwardly.

Lord Vishnu exhibited Himselves in Mahabharatha... as just a HUMBLE-SERVANT on one side...

... as also the Ominipotent God... on the other side.

Similarly Hanuman exhibited Himself in Ramayana as the Humble Servant of Rama and His Devotees... on one-side

...as also the invincible Terror to His Enemies... on the other side parallally.

In one of the Sri-Vaishnava Temples for Rama, at Chennai...

...Hanuman is very famous for His benign Grace quite fast to the seekers...

...rather so called VARA-PRASADI... (Boon-bestower)...

..the Namam Alankaram (Thirumanh on the holy Face) of Hanuman... is adored like Viboothi Sign for Shiva...

...Three lines HORIZONTALLY.... Not Vertically as Namam.!

Even Rama the God-leader has left the Earth towards His permanent abode Vaikunta..

..while His Ambassador Hanuman... the Chiranjeevi.. has not accompanied His Master, Rama...

..but preferred to continue His duties towards His Devotees... even after Two Yugas..

...by overstaying on Earth, during Kali-yuga too.!!!

Rather Hanuman still exists here and is LIVING WITH US ... on Earth.

So it is NOT WRONG to believe and worship Hanuman...

... as the awathara of the Lord Siva.
.

CLUELESS
7th January 2009, 05:57 PM
can anyone provide the lyrics and translation of:-
YAAROO IVAN YAROO


by ARUNACHALA KAVIYAR IN
RAMA NATAKA KEERTHANAI

thanks

podalangai
7th January 2009, 06:33 PM
can anyone provide the lyrics and translation of:-
YAAROO IVAN YAROO


by ARUNACHALA KAVIYAR IN
RAMA NATAKA KEERTHANAI

thanks

There's a version on Chennai Online:
http://archives.chennaionline.com/music/Thamizhsongs/2004/song26.asp

Ramanatakam is a beautiful work, both in terms of its music, but also as an interpretation of the story of Rama. Does anyone know of books which compare the various Tamil versions of the Ramayana?

CLUELESS
7th January 2009, 08:03 PM
THANKS FOR THE LINK.
ARE THERE OTHER SOURCES ON THIS SUBLECT?
REGARDS.

Raghu
23rd June 2009, 07:49 PM
can some one elaborate on Lava Kusa story pls?