correction

[Guest guest]

A slight correction to the first paragraph of my posting regarding Mrs.

Krishnamachari's questions on Sri Ramayanam. I was distracted by several

phone calls and inadvertently combined two thoughts.

 

What I meant to say: Some Oriental views of Sri Ramayana suggest that it is

a synopsis of a number of incidents in the lives of a number of Sri Ramas

(indeed, in Thailand the names Rama and Sita are utilized as generic titles

of the reigning king and queen, to show that the story is an ongoing one).

However, this does not seem to be the prevalent view in traditional

Vedic/Hindu thought, and is certainly not the view of the SriVaishnava

Sampradayam. Instead, it seems that the later poets wanted to render the

story in such a manner as to make it clear that Sri Rama is an Avathara of

the Lord, and His earthly activities were as much a result and proof of His

Saulabhyam as they were intended to set an example of Dharmic behavior.

 

Daasanu Daasan,

 

Mohan