Is there any one who can tell me the main deviation between Ramayan and Mahabharat?
-
Welcome to Tamil Brahmins forums.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our Free Brahmin Community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
religion
- Thread starter sridharanr
- Start date
- Status
In Ramayana, Rama willingly ceded his kingdom to his younger brother Bharathan. He loved all this brothers and they also loved him so much.
In Mahabharatham, the Kauravas by conspiracy and cheating took away even the rightful share in the kingdom due to the Pandavas, their own brethren.
In Ramayana, Sita was cunningly and stealthily kidnapped by Ravana. In Mahabharatham, the Pandavas willingly lost their better half in the game of dice.
In Ramayana, all the sane and wise men including monkeys stood beside Rama. (Ravana was deserted by his own brother Vibhishana who joined the rival camp). It was not out of any compulsion.
In Mahabharatham, even Bhishma, Dronacharya, Karna and Vidhura in spite of their good, noble character had to fight on the side of the Kauravas, which they considered as their sacred duty.
In Ramayana, Rama went to the enemy's place and defeated him.
In Mahabharatham, the war took place in a common place - Kurushethram.
In Ramayana, the number of characters is less and the story is also very straight.
In Mahabharatham, the characters are innumerable and similarly, there are a lot of
sub-stories or side-stories.
In Ramayana, the moral is quite simple and plain - Don't develop a liking for another person's wife.
In Mahabharatham, the morals told are very practical and countless in that they will be useful to every human being to practise, at each stage of one's life.
Ramayana ended on a happy note, with Sri Rama's Pattabhishekam and reuniting of Rama and Lakshman with their brothers and mothers.
Mahabharatham saw the ending of the Pandava vamsam despite their victory in the Kurushethram war.
Rama despite knowing that Sita was of impeccable character, banished her from Ayodhya.
In Mahabharatham, the Pandavas did not suspect the fidelity of Panchali at any stage.
In terms of time, Ramayana happened first.
Mahabhartham happened much later.
In both Ramayana and Mahabharatham, Hanuman figures.
In Mahabharatham, the Kauravas by conspiracy and cheating took away even the rightful share in the kingdom due to the Pandavas, their own brethren.
In Ramayana, Sita was cunningly and stealthily kidnapped by Ravana. In Mahabharatham, the Pandavas willingly lost their better half in the game of dice.
In Ramayana, all the sane and wise men including monkeys stood beside Rama. (Ravana was deserted by his own brother Vibhishana who joined the rival camp). It was not out of any compulsion.
In Mahabharatham, even Bhishma, Dronacharya, Karna and Vidhura in spite of their good, noble character had to fight on the side of the Kauravas, which they considered as their sacred duty.
In Ramayana, Rama went to the enemy's place and defeated him.
In Mahabharatham, the war took place in a common place - Kurushethram.
In Ramayana, the number of characters is less and the story is also very straight.
In Mahabharatham, the characters are innumerable and similarly, there are a lot of
sub-stories or side-stories.
In Ramayana, the moral is quite simple and plain - Don't develop a liking for another person's wife.
In Mahabharatham, the morals told are very practical and countless in that they will be useful to every human being to practise, at each stage of one's life.
Ramayana ended on a happy note, with Sri Rama's Pattabhishekam and reuniting of Rama and Lakshman with their brothers and mothers.
Mahabharatham saw the ending of the Pandava vamsam despite their victory in the Kurushethram war.
Rama despite knowing that Sita was of impeccable character, banished her from Ayodhya.
In Mahabharatham, the Pandavas did not suspect the fidelity of Panchali at any stage.
In terms of time, Ramayana happened first.
Mahabhartham happened much later.
In both Ramayana and Mahabharatham, Hanuman figures.
Last edited:
Both are Great Epics and have message for humanity.From Ramayana we learn the way to lead life as demonstrated by none other than Lord Rama.HE sets highest standards in life.In short it teaches what all to do in a positive way.
In Mahabharatha we learn what all we should not have or do like greed,gambling,enmity,jealousy etc etc.
In the end in both Truth and Dharma prevails.
In Mahabharatha we learn what all we should not have or do like greed,gambling,enmity,jealousy etc etc.
In the end in both Truth and Dharma prevails.
Every thing is fine and well said - but one aspect of Ramayan greatly differs from that of Mahabharat, you can still figure it out.
I agree - but one major difference separates Ramayan and Mahabharat - I will come back after hearing some more replies to my query.
You are very close - you can still figure it out.
sridhar,
from your intial query, gentle and well meaning folks like pannvalan & sabesan, put in all their effort, to give you the benefit of their knowledge.
it now appears, you now knew what you were seeking from the public, all along. it was more a 'test' of the calibre of the public.
to me, it not only looks unfair, but i see it as you playing one big game here. the public, and especially the good folks here, are your pawns for you to test, play and tease.
sir, don't you think it is not only unfair playing such games against your kind?
not sure what you are trying to get at, but any clarification from you will be most welcome.
thank you.
Dear Sridhar,
I concur with what is said by Kunjuppu. It appears that you have put a test to other members here.
Anyway, I conclude my response with this.
Rama lived the life of an ordinary mortal. He did not perform any miracles, except showing his military prowess (archery).
Krishna performed many tricks and even adopted some unacceptable tactics to mislead and confuse his rivals/adversaries. E.g. betraying Karna, Advancing the Amavasya by a day for commencement of the war by hiding the Sun etc.
He also performed certain miracles like giving unending vasthra to Draupadi.
For heaven's sake don't link the full Krishna's life (Krishnavatar) to Mahabharatham.
Both are separate stories in their own right.
If you are still unsatisfied, I have one more answer which I shall reveal it after knowing what exactly you have in mind and still expect the same thing from the mouth of other members.
I concur with what is said by Kunjuppu. It appears that you have put a test to other members here.
Anyway, I conclude my response with this.
Rama lived the life of an ordinary mortal. He did not perform any miracles, except showing his military prowess (archery).
Krishna performed many tricks and even adopted some unacceptable tactics to mislead and confuse his rivals/adversaries. E.g. betraying Karna, Advancing the Amavasya by a day for commencement of the war by hiding the Sun etc.
He also performed certain miracles like giving unending vasthra to Draupadi.
For heaven's sake don't link the full Krishna's life (Krishnavatar) to Mahabharatham.
Both are separate stories in their own right.
If you are still unsatisfied, I have one more answer which I shall reveal it after knowing what exactly you have in mind and still expect the same thing from the mouth of other members.
I am terribly sorry - my intention was not that. The idea is if the topic is closed abruptly one may not see so much knowledge pouring out, enriching everyone in this forum. No doubt I will send you a PM. Since, I myself is new to this form and wish to learn a lot from others, I thought this is the best way to know more of Ramayan and Mahabharat. I have also said that Mr.Pannvalan is very close to the answer.
This is a discourse on God, and I don't think prolonging it to any length will construe as bad.
- r sridharan
I myself is new to the topic of religion and I have no intention of testing others here - I was going through C.Rajagopalachary's Ramayan and one great truth revealed by him at the end impressed me so much and I simultaneously happened to stumble upon this site, I thought this is the right place to discuss what I read.
Your reply is almost near and let me hear more from you, sir.
I know am deviating from the main topic…but I see a lot of healthy discussion in this forum and tempted to bring in more topics J
To all those who said Rama as the hero of Ramayana - I plead to differ … To me, Hanuman is the super hero of the epic – His source of strength could be Rama but he indeed is the super hero - impeccable intelligence with a child like innocence.
Hanuman finds Sita, comforts her with Rama’s message, sows the seeds of Rama nama in Vibhishana, single handedly jerks whole of Lanka, gets Sanjeevini to save Lakshmana (in record time), saves Rama and Lakshmana from Ahiravana (patala loka episode) – don’t get me wrong – its not the tangible strength (physical and mental) that am applauding but his humbleness shraddha / sharangathi despite the strength – Hanuman is an instant dose of inspiration. - If Hanuman can be called as a “support” role, then yes Krishna also does play a support role in Mahabharatha - as someone said before.
Linking this to the main topic, well with different incidences / characters / style / narration, it’s the same truth said to suit the different yugas.
One main difference that at once occurs to me is Bhagawadh geeta - Its hard to find an equal to Hanuman’s character in Ramayana and equally difficult is to find a match for Bhagawadh Geeta in Mahabharatha.
More to follow J
To all those who said Rama as the hero of Ramayana - I plead to differ … To me, Hanuman is the super hero of the epic – His source of strength could be Rama but he indeed is the super hero - impeccable intelligence with a child like innocence.
Hanuman finds Sita, comforts her with Rama’s message, sows the seeds of Rama nama in Vibhishana, single handedly jerks whole of Lanka, gets Sanjeevini to save Lakshmana (in record time), saves Rama and Lakshmana from Ahiravana (patala loka episode) – don’t get me wrong – its not the tangible strength (physical and mental) that am applauding but his humbleness shraddha / sharangathi despite the strength – Hanuman is an instant dose of inspiration. - If Hanuman can be called as a “support” role, then yes Krishna also does play a support role in Mahabharatha - as someone said before.
Linking this to the main topic, well with different incidences / characters / style / narration, it’s the same truth said to suit the different yugas.
One main difference that at once occurs to me is Bhagawadh geeta - Its hard to find an equal to Hanuman’s character in Ramayana and equally difficult is to find a match for Bhagawadh Geeta in Mahabharatha.
More to follow J
jai,
i am in agreement with you.
in my very young age (single digits) i used to be ramayana racounter in the family.
any guests who used to come, and where currently people put their young children on show to play an instrument or sing, for me it was ramayana katha kalashebham.
on a good instance, this used to take 2 hours and i used to do it nonstop, much to the amusement of the younger crowd, but adoration of the older folks.
even at that time, i was more enamoured by hanuman. much for the same qualities that you describe.
nowadays, the most prayer, which i repeat several times a day, irrespective of where i am or what time it is, is the simple ode to hanuman..
Asaadhya Saadhaka Swaamin Asaadhyam Thava Kim Vadha / Raama Dhootha Krupaa Sindhoh Muth Kaaryam Saadhaya Prabhoh
not knowing sanskrit, i do not know the meaning of it. would not mind knowing what it means.
but this is my prayer & the prayer of everyday that i have told my children.
hanuman is also into body building, which i think is a good feature for our own boys, for it builds confidence.
hanuman has strength and our boys need that too.
hanuman has a sense of humour and uses his tail to match the height of ravana's throne.. our boys need that too.
hanuman knows how to treat women with respect, without being shy.
hanuman is a born traveller, not hesitating to go far and wide with a stated purpose.
hanuman is a motivated go getter, whether it be sanjeevi or seetha.
above all, hanuman is a loyal friend.
all in all, hanuman is a good role model for our male teenagers.
i am in agreement with you.
in my very young age (single digits) i used to be ramayana racounter in the family.
any guests who used to come, and where currently people put their young children on show to play an instrument or sing, for me it was ramayana katha kalashebham.
on a good instance, this used to take 2 hours and i used to do it nonstop, much to the amusement of the younger crowd, but adoration of the older folks.
even at that time, i was more enamoured by hanuman. much for the same qualities that you describe.
nowadays, the most prayer, which i repeat several times a day, irrespective of where i am or what time it is, is the simple ode to hanuman..
Asaadhya Saadhaka Swaamin Asaadhyam Thava Kim Vadha / Raama Dhootha Krupaa Sindhoh Muth Kaaryam Saadhaya Prabhoh
not knowing sanskrit, i do not know the meaning of it. would not mind knowing what it means.
but this is my prayer & the prayer of everyday that i have told my children.
hanuman is also into body building, which i think is a good feature for our own boys, for it builds confidence.
hanuman has strength and our boys need that too.
hanuman has a sense of humour and uses his tail to match the height of ravana's throne.. our boys need that too.
hanuman knows how to treat women with respect, without being shy.
hanuman is a born traveller, not hesitating to go far and wide with a stated purpose.
hanuman is a motivated go getter, whether it be sanjeevi or seetha.
above all, hanuman is a loyal friend.
all in all, hanuman is a good role model for our male teenagers.
Last edited:
S
sapthajihva
Guest
Shri Rama led by example as a human; ie., paramathma under the rules and regulations of a jivathma.
Shri Krishna exhibited his apara powers; he took it upon himself to enlighten the people. It is another fact that he had to tell the whole Geetha to Arjuna to convince him to perform his duty! In other words, a jivathma found it difficult to blindly listen to the paramathma unless he was convinced of the logic behind it!!!.
Shri Krishna exhibited his apara powers; he took it upon himself to enlighten the people. It is another fact that he had to tell the whole Geetha to Arjuna to convince him to perform his duty! In other words, a jivathma found it difficult to blindly listen to the paramathma unless he was convinced of the logic behind it!!!.
This seems another beautiful aspect more close to what I read in Rajagopalachari's Ramayan.
Mr.Pannvalan comments 'Rama lived the life of an ordinary mortal. He did not perform any miracles, except showing his military prowess (archery)' together with Mr.Sapthajihva's exposure are very close to the narration of Sri Rajagopalachari.
In my opinion Sri Rama's ordeal was more difficult than Sri Krishnas's in Mahabharath.
S
sapthajihva
Guest
Shri sridharan, Rajaji portrayed Rama as a 'purushottaman', ie., the greatest among men, but did not ascribe divinity to him as do our scriptures...
I have read his 'Chakravarthi Thirumagan' in tamil (it could be the abridged version?), but am wondering what Rajaji had implied in his statements as you seek here! (my memory serves me poor now).
Regards,
I have read his 'Chakravarthi Thirumagan' in tamil (it could be the abridged version?), but am wondering what Rajaji had implied in his statements as you seek here! (my memory serves me poor now).
Regards,
Rama married only one lady (sita). He dont even have the capability to save her.
Krishna married eight ladies and also a lot of gopikas. But protected everyone. He never suspected anyone's character.
Personally I hate rama for his character. He too lived the whole year alone without sita. Why dont he enter into the fire to prove himself? (Is it the rule applicable only to ladies?). A person who left his country for 12 years is considered as died (Because of this only, kaikeyi asked boon like that). How rama then become king? what he did to overcome the problem? ... There are so many issues to raise in ramayana.
But I love krishna. Act according to the situation. Anything is right, when we are leading in the right path. His preaching of karma is excellent. He enjoyed his own life and makes other's life too like that. In ramayana, always "SOGAMAYAM".
Thats all...
Krishna married eight ladies and also a lot of gopikas. But protected everyone. He never suspected anyone's character.
Personally I hate rama for his character. He too lived the whole year alone without sita. Why dont he enter into the fire to prove himself? (Is it the rule applicable only to ladies?). A person who left his country for 12 years is considered as died (Because of this only, kaikeyi asked boon like that). How rama then become king? what he did to overcome the problem? ... There are so many issues to raise in ramayana.
But I love krishna. Act according to the situation. Anything is right, when we are leading in the right path. His preaching of karma is excellent. He enjoyed his own life and makes other's life too like that. In ramayana, always "SOGAMAYAM".
Thats all...
... hmmm thats how Krishna made it seem... 7 brothers brutally killed, parents jailed for many years, ordeals started right from day 6 when boothana came ... and thereafter one after other many many encounters, some blame game, comparisons, huge responsiblity in protecting dharma; letting go of the comfort zone of Gokula for the call of duty .... he went through many mnay things ... but Krishna did all that with a smile... as if it was a play... an thats how he wants us to lead our lives.. Tell me - Is'nt this more leading by example ?
You have a point to make. But, from birth, Krishna was always endowed with magical powers and godly traits. So, he was able to withstand everything you have listed and could pooh-pooh so many things himself.
But, Rama's life was not like that.
"Oru Vil, Oru Sol and Oru Il' (One bow, One word and One consort) makes Rama more acceptable. But such comparison is unwanted and unnecessary. Can you compare Kamban with Bharathi or Shakepeare?
But, Rama's life was not like that.
"Oru Vil, Oru Sol and Oru Il' (One bow, One word and One consort) makes Rama more acceptable. But such comparison is unwanted and unnecessary. Can you compare Kamban with Bharathi or Shakepeare?
E
[email protected]
Guest
To All: The Ramayana and Mahabartha is just happen every day to day life in every person. This was told as the story. Rama was Guru and Hanuman was the disciple.This gives a teaching to the world that is every one should get a Guru. In mahabaratha the 5 brothers is our five gunas and 100 brothers is worldly things and Maya. The place of war called Kurushathra is the human body and every one should burn their worldly desires and getrid from births and deaths. s.r.k.
Here is what I intended in starting this topic:
In the Rama avatar, Rama did not know that he was God incarnate. Krishna knew that he was an avatar and acted accordingly. The despair and grief that Rama experienced as a man, Krishna never knew. When he sucked as the demon-woman's breast or was bound with a rope and thrashed for mischief, he cared not nor grieved. Standing weaponless in the battle-field, he led the warrior to destroy the wicked.
Where as the man Rama had to suffer at every turn of event. He had to muster support. He never knew how to cross the sea. Being a man, he succumbed in the battle-field only to get revived by Hanuman. Like any mortal being he had to doubt Seeta.
The moral of both Ramayan and Mahabarath lies in the great truth that sorrow and joy are both alike the play of God. God himself took with him his divine spouse, the embodiment of his own supreme compassion, into the world of men and women, and enacted with her a great drama of joy and sorrow in the Ramayan!
- r sridharan
In the Rama avatar, Rama did not know that he was God incarnate. Krishna knew that he was an avatar and acted accordingly. The despair and grief that Rama experienced as a man, Krishna never knew. When he sucked as the demon-woman's breast or was bound with a rope and thrashed for mischief, he cared not nor grieved. Standing weaponless in the battle-field, he led the warrior to destroy the wicked.
Where as the man Rama had to suffer at every turn of event. He had to muster support. He never knew how to cross the sea. Being a man, he succumbed in the battle-field only to get revived by Hanuman. Like any mortal being he had to doubt Seeta.
The moral of both Ramayan and Mahabarath lies in the great truth that sorrow and joy are both alike the play of God. God himself took with him his divine spouse, the embodiment of his own supreme compassion, into the world of men and women, and enacted with her a great drama of joy and sorrow in the Ramayan!
- r sridharan
In the Rama avatar, Rama did not know that he was God incarnate. Krishna knew that he was an avatar and acted accordingly.
One should read the two stories with this difference in mind.
This isn't a topic on business to incorporate value addition - as a matter of fact none of us have added any thing new and I don't think there is any harm in seeing every ones view point in a forum like this. Many meanings can be derived in both Ramayan and Mahabharat and their beauty appreciated in many ways.
It is said that the more we read and listen to Ramayan and Mahabharat, we will be saved from sin and sorrow.
I believe Rama very well knew he was an avatar and so did Krishna – but the purpose of the avatar and the backdrop /stage (yugas) were very different, demanding an entirely different set of behavior - this holds good for all avtaars – in fact I believe this holds good for every human. That said, Hinduism is very symbolic and perhaps the intention is that one will have to graduate to the subtle level of understanding the higher / spiritual implications of each of these avtaars as one progresses on the path of self realisation
- throughout, Hinduism emphasizes on “self realisation” and seldom have I come across any usage / emphasis on “god realisation”
Without knowing himself as incarnation of god, how can he give "Jatayu Moksha"?
- Status
Share this page
Share this page
Latest ads
-
Job [Looking to Hire] Need Tamil brahmin cook for homeWe need someone who will cook breakfast, lunch, and dinner for the day.
- Infinity (+0 /0 /-0)
- Updated:
- Expires
-
-
Wanted Need home cooked food in tirunelveliNamaskaram Does anyone have contact of a mami or any tamil brahmin household who cater home...
- anusubbu (+0 /0 /-0)
- Updated:
-
Service [Cook Available] Home cooked food Dabba SupplyI provide home cooked food delivery. Simple breakfast menu (idly, dosa, chapathy, upma, pongal...
- Akila Mahesh (+0 /0 /-0)
- Updated: