[Advaita-l] Ramopakhyana of Mahabharata vs. the Uttara Kanda of Ramayana

[V Subrahmanian]

One may look into the Bhagavatam too where the Ramayana story  is condensed.

vs

On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 10:39 PM, S Jayanarayanan via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> Thanks to Neelakantan (on advaitin list) for the note on Samkshepa
> Ramayana not containing any reference to the Uttara Kanda.
>
> One more reason that the original Valmiki Ramayana may not have any
> reference to the Uttara Kanda:
> The Phalashruti at the end of the Yuddha Kanda, appears complete (
> http://www.valmikiramayan.net/utf8/yuddha/sarga128/yuddha_128_frame.htm )
> --
>
>   "By studying and listening to this epic, all the gods get appeased. By
> listening to this Ramayana, the forefathers forever get pleased.
>   To those persons who transcribe with devotion this collection of poems
> depicting the story of Rama residence in heaven is assured.
>   By listening to this highly meaningful and auspicious poetical
> composition, a person gets family-prosperity, augmentation in money and
> grain, superior women, exquisite happiness and all the acquisition of
> wealth on this earth.
>   This narrative is to be listened invariably by good people, seeking for
> wisdom, longevity, health, fame, fraternity, intelligence, welfare and
> brilliance."
>
> There are now three points against the Uttara Kanda being a part of the
> original Ramayana:
>
> (1) Ramopakhyana ends with the Yuddha Kanda, no mention of any events of
> Uttara Kanda whatsoever.
> (2) Samkshepa Ramayana at the beginning of the Valmiki Ramayana has no
> reference to the Uttara Kanda.
> (3) The full Phalashruti appears at the end of the Yuddha Kanda.
>
> There is now only one point in favor of the Uttara Kanda being a part of
> the original text:
>
> The Gayatri Mantra that is supposed to be strung in the Ramayana, as the
> first letter of every thousand shlokas, may not be perfect. (Needs
> confirmation)
>
> S Jayanarayanan wrote:
>
> > It has debated whether or not the Uttara Kanda constitutes a part of the
> original Valmiki Ramayana, or is a later addition to the text.
> >
> > Here is the reason why I believe the Uttara Kanda may not have been a
> part of the original Valmiki Ramayana:
> > The Mahabharata actually contains the "Story of Rama, the Son of
> Dasaratha", known as "Ramopakhyana". After talking about Rama and Lakshmana
> going to the forest, Sita's captivity, Hanuman setting fire to Lanka, war
> with Kumbhakarna, death of Ravana, freeing Sita etc., it ends with:
> > "And then assisted by the celestial Rishi (Vasishtha), Rama performed on
> the banks of the Gomati ten horse sacrifices without obstruction of any
> kind and with treble presents unto Brahmanas."
> >
> > Surprising that the "Ramopakhyana" as narrated in the Mahabharata ends
> exactly at the same place as the Yuddha Kanda of the Valmiki Ramayana (i.e.
> the beginning of Rama Rajyam), with no mention of the later events of the
> Uttara Kanda!
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>