Tags

, ,


There are n numbers of the followers of
Shree Ram. He is known for his
Characteristics and for the principles.
He is known for moral behavior. He is
one from whom we people get the
inspiration to follow the noble path. He
is one who inspire people of every age
group to follow the path of “Dharma”.
It is unfortunate that Dr. Ambedkar has
fallen in riddle in case of virtues Shi
Ram also. Let’s discuss and examine
logics of Dr. Ambedkar In case of
Riddle of Shri Ram along with the story
mentioned in Valmiki Ramayana, which
Dr. Ambedkar considered simple and
has said that there is nothing
sensational about it.
Dr. Ambedkar in his riddle of Rama
has mentioned that Dasharath had three
wives, Kaushalya, Kaikai and Sumitra
besides several hundred concubines.
Vedic principle is only for only one
wife. Dhasharatha was having three
wives and this is against the Vedic
principles. However claim of Dr.
Ambedkar is that he was having
hundreds of concubines stands
nowhere. Story mentioned in the
Ramayana does not support the claim
of Dr. Ambedkar. In the 6 Sarg of
Balkand of Ramayana while explaining
about the Dasharath, Valmki has said
him “Jitendraya” i.e. one who control
his wishes.
बलवान निहितामित्रो मित्रवान विजितेन्द्रिय । बालकाण्ड षष्ठ
सर्ग श्लोक – ३
If Dasharath was having several
hundreds of concubines, as claimed by
Dr. Ambedkar he would not have been
called “Jitendriya” by Valmiki.
Dr. Ambedkar
proclaims that
Rama’s birth is
miraculous and it
may be that the
suggestion that he
was born form a
pinda prepared by
the sage Shrung is
allegorical glass to
cover the naked
truth that he was
begotten upon
Kaushalya by the
sage Shrung
although the two
did not stand in
the relationship of
husband and wife.
Claim of Ambedkar is totally baseless.
He accuses Kaushalya of having
unethical relationship with sage Shrung
however fails to provide any
corresponding facts about his claim.
Ignoring different chapters in Valmiki
Ramayana on the birth of Rama and
putting forward own baseless story is
the allegorical glass in real sense which
Ambedkar was using.
Dashrath was not having child. Sage
Shrung was invited to perform the
Yagya to cure the disease. And different
Kings along with the all four “Varns”
were invited by Dasharath on this
Occasion.
ततः सुमन्त्रमाहूय वसिष्ठो वाक्यमप्रवीत
निमन्त्रयस्व नृपतीन पृथिव्यां ये च धार्मिकाः
ब्राहम्मणान क्षत्रियान वैश्यान शुद्रांश्चैव सहस्रशः।
१९/२० बालकाण्डे त्रयोदश सर्ग
He invited noble people from all the
countries. Dashrath asked Sumant to go
to Mithila to invite King “Janak” in the
same way King of Kahi and king of
Kaikay and in-laws of Dashrath was also
invited along with his son. Lot of
people from different countries were
invited to take part in the “Putresthi”
yagya. Valmiki says in 13 Sarga of
Balkand that Dasharath requests to
invite all the kings of south India. He
further ask Sumant to invite all the
Kings of this earth along with their
relatives and supporters. Invitations
were send to all the kings and their
relatives as per the directions of the
Dasharath.
दाक्षिणात्यान नरेन्द्रांश्च समस्तानानयस्व ह
सन्ति स्निग्धाश्च ये चान्ये राजानः पृथिवीतले
तानानय यथा क्षिप्रं सांऊगां सह्बान्धवान्
एतान दुतैर्महाभागैरानयस्व नृपाज्ञया।
२८/२९ बालकाण्डे त्रयोदश सर्ग
Further Valkimi states in “Balkand” that
Rishi Shrung perform the putreshti
Yagna. He says that “O King! I will
perform the “Putreshti yagna” with the
Mantras of Atharveda. Purpose of this
yagya will be fulfilled on following the
process given in Atharveda.
यष्टिं ते हं करिष्यामि पुत्रियां पुत्रकारणात
अथर्व शिरसि प्रोक्तैर्मन्त्रै सिद्धां विधानतः।
२ पंचदश सर्गः बालकाण्ड
At the end of the Yagna Sage Shring
prepares the medicine and ask Dashrath
to go to their wives and provide the
medicine. He assures Dashrath that his
wish of having son will come true.
भार्यानामनुरपाणामश्रीतेती प्रयच्छ वै
तासु त्वम् लप्य्स्यसे पुत्रान यदर्थं यजसे नृप।
२० बालकाण्डे षोडश सर्गः
It is clearly stated in the Valmiki
Ramayan that it was a mammoth
organization in Ayodhaya in which
kings from whole world was invited
along with their relatives. “Putreshti
Yagna” was performed by the Rishis. On
the basis of that medicines were
prepared by the Rishis and handed over
to Dashrath to get his wish fulfilled.
In the light of above facts baseless
allegation of Dr. Ambedkar stands
nowhere. Neither the facts of Ramayana
supports his claims nor has he given
any basis of what he has written. It
seems complete baseless result less
attempt to malign the image of Noble
person Shree Ram.
Dr Ambedkar further writes that
“Valmiki states in his Ramyanana by
emphasizing the fact that Ram is an
Avatar of Vishnu”.
It is something which he has written on
the basis of adulterate verses of
Ramayana. Stand is not made on the
basis of adulterated verses. As the
Rama is called incarnation of Vishnu on
the same basis Mahatma Buddha is also
declared incarnation of Vishnu. But the
verses of Bhagavat puran (Pratham
Skandh, third Chapter) declaring
Mahatma Buddha as incarnation of
Vishnu will not be acceptable to any of
the follower of Buddha or the follower
Ambedkar as the adulterated verses
doesn’t have any base.
Dr. Ambedkar writes that according to
the Valmiki Ramayana Sita is not the
natural born child found by a farmer in
his field while ploughing it and
presented by him to king Janaka and
brought up by Janka. It was there
superficial sense that Sita could be said
to be the daughter of Janaka.
This claim is again on the basis of
adulterated verses. Dr. Ambedkar has
ignored deliberately or un deliberately
verses of Ramayana stating that Sita
was the daughter of King Janak and his
wife.
Swami Vidyanand saraswati writes that
how it can be considered that Sita was
born from earth when in Valmiki
Ramayana at many places Sita is called
“Aatmaj” of Janka (वर्धमानां मम आत्मजः।
बालकाण्ड ६६/१५ , जनकात्मजे (युद्ध ११/१८ ),
जनकात्मजा ( रघुवंश १३/७८ )
“Aatmajah” stand for generated from
his own body.
During her stay in forests, Sita discusses
with Anusuiya in the Aashrama of Atri
Muni that :
प्राणी प्रदाने च यत्पुरा तवाग्नि सन्निधौ
अनुशिष्टम् जनन्या में वाक्यं तदपि में धृतम।
अयोध्या कांड ११८ /८-९
Whatever advises given to me by my
mother at the time of my marriage I
have not forgotten that. I have adopted
all that in my behavior.
Whether in this statement, of
describing the advices at the time of
marriage, Earth can be called the
advisor? Whether it was earth who
weep while sending Sita with the Rama?
Tulaseedas even has noted the name of
her mother as Sunayana.
जनक वाम दिसि सोह सुनयना,
हिमगिरि संग बनी जिमी मैना।
रामचरितमानस ३५६/२
In the Ramayana at the time of
marriage name of 22 forefathers of
Rama have remembered in the same
manner name of forefathers of Sita
have been also remembered. If earth
would have been the mother of Sita in
that case who would be called the
forefathers of earth?
Sita coming out of the earth is a gross
gossip which Dr. Ambedkar has used in
riddle. It is total hearsay. Neither the
Valmiki Ramayana Support this fact nor
the common sense.
Dr Ambedkar further states that
according to Buddha Ramayana, Sita
was the sister of Rama, both were the
children of Dasharatha. He further
states that “Among the Aryans marriage
between brothers and sisters were
allowed.
This is again the imagination of the Dr.
Ambedkar and the writer of Buddha
Ramayana. Ancient text that is available
about the Rama is Valmiki Ramayana.
And other books about the Ram were
written in later years. But that Ram and
Sita was brother and sister is not
supported by any of the version of
Ramayan.
In supporting his views Dr. Ambedkar
has proclaimed that in Aryans marriage
between brothers and sisters were
allowed. This is again completed
baseless allegation which Dr. Ambedkar
has put forward. It shows the ignorance
of Dr. Amebdkar regarding the topic he
was writing.
Oldest law of this earth is Manu Smriti.
Aryans have been following it up for
sagas to sagas. Let’s see what Manu
Smriti says about the marriage part.
असपिण्डा च या मातुरगोत्रा च या पितुः
सा प्रशस्ता द्विजातीनां दारकर्मणि मैथुने
“A girl, who is not descended on his
mother’s side within the sixth degree
and does not bear the same family
name (Gotra) as his father’s. is eligible
for marriage.” MANU 3: 5.
In the absence of evidence about the
allegation, and in the presence of clear
law of Manu who can say that Sita and
Rama was brother and sister?
Dr. Ambedkar further says that Rama
was not monogamous and was having
many wives along with lot of
concubines. But the reference provided
by Dr. Ambedkar does not confirm his
allegation that Shri Ram was having
many wives or concubines.
Dr. Ambedkar has alleged Rama to
abandon Sita in a state of pregnancy
and for the murder of Shambuk etc.
This again a combinations of
adulterated verses on which Dr.
Ambedkar has relied. He has forgotten
to consider that Valmiki has written
Ramayana as it was elaborated by
Narada to him. Narada had elaborated
story up to the Lanka war. In that case
how Valmiki would have written the
Uttar kand .Full of these rubbish stories
used to malign the images of Rama.
In the Balkand 1 Sarag , Naradas says :
नंदीग्रामे जटाम हित्वा भ्रातृभि सहितो नघ :
रामः सीतामनुप्राप्य राज्यम पुनर वाप्तवान्।
After completing his tenure of forest
stay Rama took hair cut at Nandi village
and lived in the Ayodhya.
Swami Vidyanand Saraswati writes that
when story was heard by Valmiki upto
the stage of coming back to Ayodhya,
how one can claim that Rama abandon
the Sita in the stage of pregnancy and
murdered Shambuk. All these stories
are baseless and part of adulteration.
There is not base of these stories
mentioned in Balkand of the Valmeeki
Ramayan.  Tulasee das has also
completed his Ramcharitmanas on the
Yuddha kand and all these baseless
stories does not have their place in
Ramcharitmanas.
As well as in the Mahabharat, Ramayan
story is mentioned with the name of
“Ramopakhyan” and their also story of
ram is completed on the Yudhdh kand.
All other stories are not in Mahabharat
also.
We can conclude on the facts given
from Valmiki Ramayana,
Ramcharitmanas and from the
Mahabharat that the claims raised by
Dr. Ambedkar on Rama are baseless
and does not stand anywhere and these
are either not supported by any verses
of the Ramayana or are written on the
basis of adulterated version in the same
way as Mahatma Buddh is said as avatar
of Vishnu.

image