Page
of
1Thanks for the information.
https://www.indiaforums.com/forum/topic/1695704?pn=2
Here I copy paste the Krittivas Ramayan Lav Kush info Semanti posted (and discussion between Semanti and Vrish in alternate colours) in her KR thread currently active once again. Just to recall or remind about the fight between Lav-Kush and their uncles in KR.
24) Shatrughna alone heard Ramayan (story till then) sung by Luv Kush while he returned from Madhupuri after slaying Lavanasur. He spent that night in Valmiki's ashram. He became very emotional to hear Ramayan but could not see the singers. He asked Valmiki about the singers but Valmiki avoided carefully.
In Valmiki, Rama explicitly asks Lakshaman to leave Sita near Valmiki's ashram, and he asks Shatrughtan to visit Valmiki. While there, on the night of KL's births, Shatrughan actually meets Sita.
Does Krittivas' account match this?
In Krittivas too, Ram asks Lakshman to leave Sita near Valmiki's ashram. But here Ram didn't ask Shatrughan to visit Valmiki, Shatrughan went to visit Valmiki himself, while on the way to Mathura (Madhupuri). Yes, on the same day Sita gave birth to Luv Kush, but Valmiki ordered his disciples not to express this news to Shatrughan. Thus it was kept secret.
Btw- in Valmiki, Shatrughan heard about Luv-Kush's birth, & knew their parent's name too, but did not meet Sita (a famous scholar wrote that, he couldn't meet Sita as Ram didn't order him to do so).
25) The war of Luv Kush with their uncles is interestingly & elaborately narrated here. This is not written by Valmiki, Krittivas adopted this incident from Jaimini Bharat. The whole war is similar with that shown by Ramanand Sagar, only with one difference. The boys not only made their uncles unconscious, they killed them, & also killed Vibhisan's & Sugriv's battle. Only Hanuman & Jamvuban were alive because they had boon of immortality. & they also fought against Ram, but neither Ram nor Luv Kush could win. The children made their father unconscious. Finally Valmiki came & made all of them alive.
Now, you've made me curious about Jaimini Bharat Besides, Vibhisan too had the boon of immortality, so he too shouldn't have died. I think the term 'killed' was loosely used by some poets.
I'm also curious about Jaimini Bharat, but couldn't find it till now. Vibhison didn't die but he did nothing mentionable here, so I eliminated his name.
Vibhishan was immortal as per Brahma's boon, unless Jaimini Bharat disagrees.
Yes I know that, & I haven't read Jaimini Bharat so can't confirm whether it disagrees or not.
Originally posted by: kimono007Hi everyone. Thanks for sharing your knowledge about Luv and Kush. I hope it must have been an enriching experience for all of us.
Only thing I would like to add is that Sage Valmiki mentions that Luv ruled Uttar Kosala with Shravasti as his capital and Kush ruled Dakshin Kosala with Kushavati (Kushinagar) as his capital. Also the fact that Sage Durvasa foretold to King Dashrath that Rama's sons will be crowned outside Ayodhya and also the fact that Bharath's, Laxman's and Shatrugan's sons shared the other parts of Ram's Kingdom and Shatrugan's Mathura (Madhupur in those days) lends credence to the fact that Ayodhya was abondoned after Ram's departure to Vaikunth. If Ayodhya continued to be a center of politics during the rule of Ram's descendants, then why did King Vikramaditya find Ayodhya in a ruined and forested state. Taking the example of Mathura ( capital of yadavas in dwapar yug and also in kali yug where Krishna's great grandson Vajranabh and his descendants ruled after being crowned by Arjun in Indraprasth after destruction at Dwarka and also the capital of Shatrugan in Treta yug ) was never found in an abondoned state as it was an active center of ancient politics. There was considerable buddhist influence in Mathura as in ancient India, many affluent politicians in courts embraced buddhism and also many Kings including those who ruled Mathura during Buddha's time patronized buddhism. The original temple at Lord Krishna's birthplace was also built by Vajranabh and there was continuous rebuilding in and around at that site since eternity. This might not have been possible had Mathura remained in obscurity as Ayodhya was during Vikramaditya's time. King Vikramaditya is also credited with rebuilding and renovating Lord Krishna's birthplace as the one built by Vajranabh and his descendants had indeed become very old. I am not quoting Mughal invasions as they arrived very late. Anyways when they arrived, Mathura was a leading center of intellectuals and arts and was the center of politics. Ayodhya was not. Hence, the fact that Mathura was a well established center of arts, politics and religion lends credence to the fact that Mathura was never abondoned and continuously nurtured to becoming an influential region. Ayodhya was not like that. It was empty with ancient buildings, temples and forests when King Vikramaditya first found it and then began his great research.Sage Valmiki only mentions the kingdoms that Luv and Kush inherited and also the kingdoms which Bharath's,Laxman's and Shatrugan's sons inherited. He does not give details about their style of rule and their descendants. It is mentioned in srimad bhagwatam.
comment:
p_commentcount