tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3442555339667770589.post3663097161342228656..comments2024-03-18T22:56:06.696+05:30Comments on Jayasree Saranathan: Discovery of 30,000 year human imprint in Siberia, the land identified as Uttarkuru.Jayasree Saranathan http://www.blogger.com/profile/01048252011566427834noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3442555339667770589.post-37490192519887299052011-01-02T23:42:47.656+05:302011-01-02T23:42:47.656+05:30The line on Ruma and Tara has been deleted. Thanks...The line on Ruma and Tara has been deleted. Thanks Mr Balaji for bringing the mistake to my notice.<br /><br />Many are under the impression that Ruma and Tara had relationship with their brother -in-laws. I hope those who read this comment would correct such a perception. The exact Sanskrit version with meaning of the relevant slokas in Kishkindha Khandam is available in http://www.valmikiramayan.net/Jayasree Saranathan https://www.blogger.com/profile/01048252011566427834noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3442555339667770589.post-64226630763081069342011-01-02T23:38:21.872+05:302011-01-02T23:38:21.872+05:30Mr Balaji writes:-
Madam,
//But at a couple of ...Mr Balaji writes:-<br /><br /><br />Madam,<br /><br />//But at a couple of slokas in the chapter where Lakshmana stormed into Shugreeva's palace to question him on his indolence, he refers to Shugreeva as Bhartha of Tara. He could have actually meant தலைவன், பிரபு, காவலன், ஆள்பவன் etc used to denote the King.//<br /><br />Yes, you are right. Maybe, he referred Sugriva something like a caretaker of Tara. This is exactly what Vaali says to Sugriva, not to treat Tara and Angada badly due to his disputes with Vaali, before he dies (As shown in Ramanand Sagar's Ramayan).Jayasree Saranathan https://www.blogger.com/profile/01048252011566427834noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3442555339667770589.post-18263807621908684552011-01-02T23:37:46.186+05:302011-01-02T23:37:46.186+05:30Dear Mr Balaji,
You are right. I checked the onl...Dear Mr Balaji, <br /><br />You are right. I checked the online translation and found that Ruma was stolen and sympathizers of Shugreeva were imprisoned by Vaali. I checked other sargas too and found that nowhere it is told that Ruma lived with Vaali or Tara lived with Shugreeva. But at a couple of slokas in the chapter where Lakshmana stormed into Shugreeva's palace to question him on his indolence, he refers to Shugreeva as Bhartha of Tara. He could have actually meant தலைவன், பிரபு, காவலன், ஆள்பவன் etc used to denote the King. <br /><br />However the translations in Tamil which I have with me (some are 80 years old) based on commentators like Govindaraja talk about the 'living in' of Ruma and Tara. My exposure to Ramayana was through these Tamil books only. Only nowadays we have exact version in Sanskrit with meaning on the net. I share your view that it is wrong to say that they lived like that. The Sanskrit verses do not say so. <br /><br />Commentaries on why Rama killed Vaali given by these old commentators are not acceptable to me and that is why I wrote what I derived myself from the Epic in my blog.Jayasree Saranathan https://www.blogger.com/profile/01048252011566427834noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3442555339667770589.post-2918509714688324692011-01-02T23:37:07.898+05:302011-01-02T23:37:07.898+05:30Mr Balaji writes:-
Madam,
Last week a...Mr Balaji writes:-<br /><br />Madam,<br /> Last week after reading one of your articles in which you said "Ruma lived with Vaali, and Tara with Sugriva", I wrote a comment saying that I cannot accept this. After going through a little bit of the Valmiki Ramayana translated by M.N.Dutt, I came to know that I was right that Ruma did not live willingly with Vaali, but he abducted her against her wishes. I am quoting a few from Kishkinda Kandam which I came across:-<br />Sections VIII (Sugriva explaining to Rama) , XVIII (Rama reminding Vaali of his mistake after shooting him), XX (Tara telling Vaali). There were many more, but since it is a pdf, I couldn't copy them as they were.<br /><br />However, even after so many references I couldn't find any quotes for Tara living with Sugriva. What I have heard is Ruma becoming the queen of Sugriva, however Tara is the one who keeps advising Sugriva (Vaali himself instructs Sugriva not to reject Tara's advises). I am sure Tara who is praised to be a Pativrata would have never lived with any other man other than Vaali, as she asks Rama to kill her with the same arrow which he shot Vaali). Nor would have Rama supported such a thing.Jayasree Saranathan https://www.blogger.com/profile/01048252011566427834noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3442555339667770589.post-73073524190327191152010-12-23T23:37:39.078+05:302010-12-23T23:37:39.078+05:30//Are there any references to this in Valmiki Rama...//Are there any references to this in Valmiki Ramayana or any other versions?//<br /><br />Guru, you are an expert in these things. Please give me the answers for your questions :)Jayasree Saranathan https://www.blogger.com/profile/01048252011566427834noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3442555339667770589.post-92094095437595883072010-12-23T21:37:24.710+05:302010-12-23T21:37:24.710+05:30Excellent article Madam. It was really great, too ...Excellent article Madam. It was really great, too much stuff for my little brain however. But I disagree on one point:-<br /><br />//Ruma living with Vali and Tara living with Shugreeva also testify this.//<br /><br />I think Ruma never 'lived with Vaali willingly' but Vaali abducted her and held her as a hostage forcibly. Similarly, I disagree firmly with the second statement. Devi Tara is said to be a Pathivrata. She is one of the Pancha-pathivrathas. How can she 'live willingly' with Sugriva?<br /><br />Are there any references to this in Valmiki Ramayana or any other versions?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com