[Advaita-l] Ramopakhyana of Mahabharata vs. the Uttara Kanda of Ramayana
sjayana at yahoo.com
Wed May 4 11:58:57 CDT 2016
Venkata sriram P venkatasriramp at yahoo.in wrote:
> My sole reason for this particular thread on Ramopakhyana is
> to question the dating of the Uttara Kanda -- whether or not it formed part
> of the original Valmiki Ramayana, nothing else!
> Read the rAmAyaNa properly..
> चतुर् विंशत् सहस्राणि श्लोकानाम् उक्तवान् ऋषिः |
> तथा सर्ग शतान् पंच षट् काण्डानि तथा उत्तरम् ||१-४-२
> ...All the 7 kANDAs were composed simultaneously.
The verse that you've quoted above says, "षट् काण्डानि" -- i.e. SIX Kandas!
Is the "uttaram" in the verse definitely a SEVENTH Kanda, or can it be construed of as simply an ending,
say, of the likes of a Stotram to Vishnu or Phalashruti?
> That is the reason I have mentioned about those foreign scholars who tried to
> fix the date.
> Keith fixes the date as 320 BC; Prof.Jacobi fixes as 6 BC.
> There are more such fascinating dates from Indian scholars
> like Prof.Bhandarkar, Sri.Chintamani Vaidya,
At the outset, let me clarify that I haven't heard the names, let alone read the works, of ANY of the scholars
that you've mentioned above. This is so that the discussion doesn't proceed along the lines of:
"He is comparing the Ramopakhyana with the Ramayana. Therefore, he must be siding with X, Y or Z!"
The question(s) I've raised about the Ramopakhyana and the Uttara Kanda are entirely from my own personal readings.
> We must go by what tradition says after proper study of shAstra
There is nothing non-traditional about asking these questions:
(1) Ramopakhyana contains events from EVERY Kanda of the Valmiki Ramayana, EXCEPTING the Uttara Kanda. Why omit a whole Kanda, if it's so important?
(2) Why does a Phalashruti for the FULL Ramayana appear at the end of the Yuddha Kanda (but not previous Kandas!)?
(Yuddha Kanda says: रामायणमिदं कृत्स्नं शृण्वतः पठतः सदा || This FULL Ramayana, one who listens or reads...)
(3) Samkshepa Ramayana, at the beginning of the Ramayana, has no reference to any narrative in the Uttara Kanda. Why not include at least a bit?
(4) The "Rama Rajyam" as described in the Yuddha Kanda talks about a sorrowless Utopia: EVERYONE is joyous (and moral)!
How can sorrowful disturbances appear within the Rama Rajyam (as claimed in Uttara Kanda), if the rule of Rama is claimed to be perfection?
(5) Ramayana 1-4-2 says the Kandas are six in number. Why not say SEVEN Kandas, by including the Uttara Kanda?
I would appreciate answers to the above questions from a "traditional" scholarly viewpoint.
But please let me know which scholar, along with background information, is being quoted!
> without carrying away by whims & fancies of western indologists !
FYI: I haven't read the work of any "Indologist" - Western or Indian - for over a decade!
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list