Re:A question of age.

[Guest guest]

SRIMATH E RAMANUJAYA NAMAHA.

 

Respected bhagavathas,

 

We are back into the discussion on the date of Raama.

 

The following are in addition to my earlier mails (in 2005) and also

as rejoinder to the recent mails by Srmaan Sadagpan Iyengar and

Srimaan Vasudevan Iyengar.

 

(1) First, how to reconcile the mention of years in 1000s in Ramayana.

 

The normal life span of human life is 100.

This is borne by

(1) the wish of "shathamaanam bhavathu",

(2) in the madhyaaniha sandhya vandanam,

(3) by Sita in sargam 34 of Sudhara khandam

and (4) the allottment of a total of 120 years to the 9 planets

together in Vedic astrology.

 

The life of a human being can not be more than a reasonale level of

120 + a few years.

 

But what constitues a year is a question when we talk about the 1000s

of years mentioned in Ramayana. I say this becasue we have in

astrology many types of years.

For instance there is a polar cycle which is about the axis of the

earth making a circle around the polar region. In other words it is

about the precession of equinoxes. By this we can say, that the Dhruva

nakshthram that Rama and sita would have seen in their vanavasam is

not the one we see now.

 

Coming to the topic, I felt gratified when, after writing my mails

on the date of Raama based on the assumption of a Polar cycle of

28,800 years with ascending (uttarayan) and descending (dakshinayan)

years of 14,400 years each, with a cycle of mini chathur yuga in each

phase, I came to know about the existence of such cycle in an

astrology text (by V.K.V.Acharya, with a preface by Paramacharyal of

Kanchi in 1956).

 

This Polar cycle, known as Saptharishi kaala, has been mentioned in

Rajatharangini. Infact this cycle is the only mode of reckoning

adopted in Rajatharangini which tells about the history of Kashmir in

pre-Christian era. Polar cycle had been in vogue in Kashmir (Please

note that Kashmir derived its name from Rishi Kahyapa and

archeological findings reveal that this is the place of early vedic

period.). Varahamihira also has laid emphasis on this 28,000 year

cycle at many places in his Pancha siddhanthika. Please note this

master piece of his is based on Surya siddhantha and Vasishta

siddhanta besides 3 other ancient works which deal with astro theories

followed at very ancient times.

 

I have attempted to answer the intrigue of Rama ruling over for

11,000 years based on this Polar cycle in my mails on " The date of

Raama - 4 & 5 ".

 

Apart from the Polar cycle, there have been in existence other modes

of calculation of years and cycles.

Like Soura maanam and chandra maanam based on Solar and Lunar

revolutions, Brahaspathiya maanam had been in vogue as per

astrological texts.

This is based on Jupiter's movement which had been in popular use in

Himalayan regions and is still being used in Ladak and Tibet.

This again is of 2 types, the 60 year cycle and 12 year cycle.

 

Thus, it is highly probable that the mention of 1000s of years in

Ramayana could be about some now-forgotten calculation of years.

 

 

 

(2) Moving to other issues, "Dasa sapta cha varshaani tava jaatasya

Putraka!" can be seen in different light.

 

The 'jaatasya' can be about the upanayanam of Raman. There is no exact

mention of time of upanayanam and it is all said in continuation of

his birth.

 

Since astrology has been very much part of life in those days, Rama's

upanayanam could not have taken place before 8 years.

 

8 year period is a crucial period because this constitutes

'baalarishta ' period. Baalaarishtam means death before 8 years.

 

The first 4 years including the period in the womb is influenced by

the mother's destiny (according to astrology). The next 4 years by

father's destiny. The child's destiny starts to work on it only after

8 years, or after this baalaarishta period.

 

Upon upanayanam, the child physically leaves the mother (after maathru

bhojanam ceremony before the start of the upanayanam ceremony.)

>From then onwards, the child is an individual, taking care of himself.

 

It is possible to assume that Kausalya meant this. She waited for 17

years for Rama's coronation after Rama had his intiation at the age of

8. This means 8+17=25

This is the age we have arrived at by other calculations.

 

 

(3) Now about what Dhasharatha says.

 

"Oona shodasa varsha: asou Ramo raajeeva lochana:

 

Na yuddha yogyataam asya pasyaami saha raakshasai:"

 

 

"My Rama is a mere infant-He has not even completed sixteen. How then could He

be equal to battling with terrible raakshasaas?" enquires the Emperor of

Visvaamitra.

 

 

Why the mention of 16?

 

Again as per astrology 16 is a crucial year.

 

The life span of man is divided into 3, alpaayusu (below 32),

madhyaayusu (between 32 and 72) and dheergayusu (between 72 and 100).

 

Half of Alpaayusu is 16 years.

By 16 years the child completes his education in Gurukulam and comes

back to the father. (The education may extend upto 24 years)

Here Rama, though a kshathriya by birth, has had vedic teaching

(refer Hanuman's description of Rama in sargam 35 of Sundhara khandam)

and could have followed the regular learning schedule of a Brahmin.

 

Dhasharatha might have meant this. Rama was still young not even had

crossed the 16 year mark of age which was alpa -alpa ayusu, not even

completed his formal education in astra vidya. How could he be

expected to battle with rakhshasas?

 

(4) By the time the couple returned to Ayodhya, Rama must have been 39

(25 + 14) and Sita 32 (18+ 14), as per this discussion.

 

(Also refer to Sri MGV's mail on this topic on message number 7633

in Olppiliappan archives)

 

 

Pranams,

 

jayasree saranathan

[Guest guest]

dear bhagavatas,

 

the mails of smt.jayashree and sri vasudevan have thrown up some interesting

points on the question of Sri Rama's age when He undertook vanavaasam.

unfortunately, i had not seen the thread of mails in 2005--otherwise i could

have attempted to address the questions in my recent article.

 

to take up first smt jayashree's explanation that in Sri Kousalya's

statement, the age of 17 could be counted not from birth but from the age of

upanayanam.

 

the argument in favour of this is--- only upon upanayanam is one considered

to be born, because one is so far ineligible for any vaideeka karmas. and

considering that the age for upanayanam for kshatriyas is 11, Rama was 28

when He came to take leave of His mother and the latter expressed her

anguish. (Incidentally, the age for upanayanam for kshatriyas is 11 and not

8, which latter applies only to brahmanaas. this is borne out by the quote,

"Ashta varsham braahmanam upanayeeta Ekaadaseshu raajanyam". hence this

would not make Rama 25 at the juncture of leaving for vanavaasam)

 

however, this suffers from two inconsistencies.

 

first and foremost, it would make Rama 28 when He left for vanavaasam and

would contradict Sri Mythily's statement that He was just 25. it would also

go against Dasaratha's statement as quoted by Maareecha, that Rama was

twelve when He was married.

 

secondly, Kousalya was obviously in considerable sorrow and despair. her

emotional state was definitely not one which would prompt her to consider

such fine points of Dharmasastra that a person is born only upon upanayanam

and not merely upon his physical birth. this is what Sri Periavaacchaan

Pillai also says in his commentary.

 

hence Kousalya considering the age of upanayanam at a time of great distress

does not appear very plausible.

 

 

as for smt jayashree's interpretation of the period of time a year covers,

to me, there appears to be no necessity for such an exercise at all. Sri

Rama was an avataram of Sriman Narayana, who is timeless and eternal. If we

are prepared to accept Sri Rama as the Lord personified, why should we

quibble at His having ruled for 11000 years? and Sri Valmiki's words do

permit any other construction being put on the matter, than is usual. If we

are to take Rama as an ordinary mortal subject to mortal laws of "Sataayu:

vai Purusha:", then we ought not to put Him at all on a divine pedestal.

normal laws of Smriti and Shruti do not apply to the Paramatma, whose

avataras are prompted, begun and ended at His own will, in accordance with

His perceptions of how long they have to last. While Sri Nrisimhavataram was

the briefest in terms of time, Sri Ramavatara could have been the longest.

in essence, we should not expect the Lord to conform to our own conceptions

of life, time and death.

 

if we are prepared to accept that He destroyed 14000 rakshasas

single-handedly, if we are prepared to believe that He blessed Sri Jatayu

and Si Sabari with emancipation, we should have no difficulty in accepting

that He reigned for 11000 years or more.

 

now for the points made by Sri Vasudevan

 

regarding "dasa varsha sapta cha", though the last word is normally used in

the sense of "and", here it indicates "more"--to mean "seven years more".

this interpretation has the approval of Sri Periavaacchaan Pillai and should

therefore be acceptable.

 

the birth of Lava and Kusa late in the lives of the Divine Couple is again a

matter of divine will. Vedas talk about the resolution of the Parabrahmam

that it become many--"Bahu syaam prajaayeyeti". similarly, the heirs to the

Ikshvaaku throne were born when there birth was considered necessary by Sri

Rama. as sri vasudevan has remarked, it appears to be a family trait of the

Ikshvaakus to beget progeny rather late in their lives. by the standards set

by Dasaratha, to whom children were born after 60000 years, Sri Rama is

comparatively early in the matter.

 

regarding the apparent puzzle of Valmiki recording events , sri vasudevan

writes--

"c) Later same vaalmeeki gives asylum for seethaa when she is banished.

If we take that it is towards the end of 11000 years, vaalmeeki was also of

same age around 11000 + years.

 

d) Is it the same vaalmeeki, who met raama in forest that who gave

asylum to seethaa and later who wrote raamaayaNam as per naaradhaa's

teaching or 3 different persons or at least 2 different persons.

 

I would like to have comments from the elite group""

 

It is doubtless the same Valmiki who affords assylum to Sita and teaches the

Rama Charitam to Her sons and the Maharshi is indubitably a contemporary of

Rama.

 

to understand how, we must banish from our mind the thought that all of

Ramayanam had happened when Valmiki was visited first by Narada and then by

Brahma, providing him the inspiration to put Rama's legend on paper. if you

analyse the first sargam of Srimad Ramayanam, popularly known as Sankshepa

Ramayanam, it provides a summary of the Rama Katha, narrated by Narada to

Valmiki. and in this, the Uttara Kaanda episodes like the banishment of Sita

do not figure. it stops with Rama's coronation and His ruling for 11000

years.

 

thus, Narada's narration to Valmiki had consisted only of happenings upto

Yuddha Kaandam.

 

the third sargam of Baala Kaandam solves this riddle with the following

slokam

 

"Anaagatam cha yat kinchit Raamasya vasudhaatale

Tat chakaara uttare kaavye Vaalmiki: bhagavan Rishi:"

 

In writing down the story of Sri Rama, Valmiki recorded not only what had

happened thus for (upto Yuddha Kaandam), but also events which would take

place in future. thus, the whole of Uttara Kaandam was composed by Valmiki

by looking into the future, for which he was afforded adequate powers by

Brahma.

 

in researching into apparent contradictions in the Epic, we must accept as

the guiding principle that nowhere in the Kavyam does Valmiki utter an

untruth or inaccuracy, for this is the boon bestowed on him by Brahma--"na

te vaak anrutaa kaavye kaachit atra bhavishyati". hence whatever has been

spoken by him is indeed the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the

truth, and if there does appear to be a contradiction, it has to be resolved

in the light of interpretations by Acharyas.

 

thanks to smt jayashree and sri vasudevan for affording me an opportunity to

study deeply slokas which i must have uttered several times in the past,

without concentrating on the purport.

 

dasan, sadagopan

 

-

"Jayasree Saranathan" <jayasree.saranathan >

<sadagopaniyengar (AT) vsnl (DOT) net>; "MG Vasudevan"

[Guest guest]

---------- Forwarded message ----------

Jayasree Saranathan <jayasree.saranathan >

Jan 11, 2007 8:32 AM

Re: Re: Re:A question of age.

Vijayaraghavan Chakravarthy <vijayaraghavan_s (AT) hotmail (DOT) com>

 

 

SrI:

 

Pranams.

Read your response.

 

Interestingly, the Ramayan contains many hidden purports in the

mention of years etc, which enhance our understanding of the times and

views expressed by the Kavi from different angles. These have been

touched upon by me in my mails in 2005. Thought you would be

interested to read them and therfore sending the links as also one of

the mails sent then.

 

The 4 mails dealing with the issues under discussion can be read in

the following

messages of Oppiliappan list.

 

Oppiliappan/message/7503 (4th mail of the series)

 

Oppiliappan/message/7502 (5th mail)

 

Oppiliappan/message/7506 (6th mail)

 

Oppiliappan/message/7561 (conclusion)

-------------------

 

(note:- The following is based on the calculation of yugas at polar

cycle of 28,000 years of 14,000 years each at ascending and

descending levels, the details of the derivation are contained in the

links mentioned above.)

 

The life span of people in different yugas are said to run in

thousands of years.

 

In his description of Jambhoo dweepa , Sanjaya says that people of

Satya yuga lived for 4000 years, those of Thretha yuga for 3000 years

and those of Dwapara yuga for 2000 thousand. But while talking about

people of Kali yuga, he gives a mixed outlook. He says that there is

no limit for the life span for the people of Kali yuga. Some are born

dead and some die after birth. And there are those born to live with

'maha satvam' and great valour. They multiply in hundreds and

thousands.

 

 

 

This description was given by Sanjaya after he looks at distant lands

at distant time periods with Doora dhrushti.

 

 

 

We find here the 4:3:2 ratio with reference to the first 3 yugas and a

not-too-clear vision of Kali yuga. By implication and continuity of

the previous yugas, the life span in Kali yuga must be 1000 years.

This makes the calculation complete as 4:3:2:1.

 

 

 

But going by what he says about progeny, we seem to get a clue. It is

impossible for a human being to live for 1000s of years. It might be

possible in a different universe with people formed of different

cellular formations. But the kind of evolution of species in this

earth rule out such existence. Since progeny is being talked about

Kali people, it may be assumed that any particular race or generation

of people will last for so many number of years. In Kali yuga there is

no certainty that all people will live 1000 years long by way of their

progeny. (A man is born as his son, so goes a dictum in our texts).

The lineage might get cut short, is the implication.

 

 

 

Another way to look at it is that the name and fame of a person in

the respective yugas will live on for so many thousands of years.

Raama's story seem to imply this. In his concluding words in the

Pattabhishka chapter, Valmiki speaks of Raama ruling the world for

11,000 years. In the beginning too, Narada while narrating the story

of Raama to Valmiki says like this.

 

 

 

" dasha varSa sahasraaNi dasha varSa shataani ca |

raamo raajyam upaasitvaa brahma lokam prayaasyati || " (1-1-97)

 

97. dasha+varSa+sahasraaNi= ten, years, thousand;

dasa+varsha+sataani+ca= ten, years, hundred, also; raamaH= Rama;

raajyam+upaasitvaa= kingdom, on reverencing; brahma+

lokam+gamishhyati= Brahma's abode, voyages.

 

"On reverencing the kingdom for ten thousand years plus another one

thousand years, [i.e. for a total of eleven thousand years,] Rama

voyages to the abode of Brahma... [1-1-97]

 

Comment: In rama raajyam upaasitvaa... the word used is upaasana is

not ruling by sceptre but 'reverentially idolised the kingdom...' as

one would regard or treat his personal god with reverence. Rama thus

reverenced his kingdom as a devotee of his subjects and this is the

concept of raama raajya.

 

 

 

 

 

The commentary above puts the entire issue in a different perspective!!

 

Raama established Raama rajyam for 10,000 + 1000 years after which He

left for His Abode. Raama rajyam stands for Raama's ideals in

different spheres of life and governance. Even at the time of Vali

vadam it is said that since the entire earth was under Ikshvahu hold,

Raama was bound to establish its dharma by slaying Vaali. It is well

known that the entire land mass was not under Ikshvahu dynasty. The

implication was that the dharma, the ideals and values systems which

the dynasty stood for , was followed throughout the land mass.

 

 

 

A similar prevalence of Raama's ideals is bound to exist till 4098 AD.

Perhaps after that, there might take place a further deterioration.

It is said at many places in the texts that Raama's story will live as

long as Himalayas and the Ganga live. Perhaps the Ganga might vanish

at or around 4098 AD like how the river Saraswathi of the Vedic age

vanished. (There is proof now that this river did indeed exist and was

the hub of growth of Vedic civilisation, perhaps in Satya yuga). The

vanishing of the Ganga is possible since Bhagirathan is supposed to

bring her down in Satya yuga, in the next cycle. (I am not sure about

the time period). Perhaps the ganga will dry up in Thretha yuga of the

night duration of the mini yuga and might get enclosed at higher

levels in the Himalayas..

 

 

 

The strong indicators for believing that the life span in those days

could not have been in thousands but within or around a hundred are as

follows:

 

 

 

Ø Brahma devan is said to live for 100 years in his time scale.

Therefore 100 is the standard year duration for longevity. Since man

is at a micro cosmic scale of the Cosmic god Brahma, and since man's

life is shaped by the influence of each of the nine planets which runs

into a total period of 120 years as calculated by sage Parashara in

the Vedas and Ithihasas, this span is roughly around 100 years.

 

 

 

Ø The blessings given by elders when one prostrates is of Vedic

origin (of satya yuga). It is ("Shatamaanam bhavathi shataayu:

purusha:…") to invoke 100 years of life for the one so blessed. This

blessing is repeated in several places in the Upanishads too.

 

 

 

Ø When one performs the daily midday supplication, the individual

prays to the sun when he is in full bloom that he may be blessed to

see him for a full life of nearly 100 years. ("PashyEma sharada:

shatham… jIvEma sharada: shatham.. etc ) This prayer also has its

origin in Vedic yuga.

 

 

 

Ø We can quote an example from Ramayana itself. In Sundhara

khandam (sargam 34) On seeing that Raama dhoothan has come to redeem

her distress, Sita says, " yethi jivantha aanandham naram

varshashathadhabhi." (If only a person were to live for a 100 years,

he would sure have 'aanandham' sometime even after a 100 years.) Here

'if only a person lives for a 100 years ' make it clear that the

average life span of a person in Thretha yuga had not been in 1000s of

years.

 

 

 

Ø But that it has been said so, can be understood in the way it

has to be, if we look into an episode involving sages Vasishta and

Vishwamithra. They once had an argument regarding which is superior -

sat-sangam or years of tapas. Vasishta said it was sat-sangam while

Vishwamithra said it was years of tapas or meditation. They went to

meet Adhisesha who was carrying the World on his shoulder, to settle

this issue. He said how he could solve this issue when he was

carrying a heavy burden. For this, Vishwamithra said that he would

give 16,000 years of his tapas to support the weight and did give. But

the world could not be held aloft. Vasishta gave a second of satsangam

and Adhisesha was relieved of the weight. But since Adhisesah

continued to remain quiet, Vishwamithra asked impatiently why he was

not giving his solution, for which sesha replied that reply was

already given. While a second of sat-sangam was able to hold the

world, 16,000 years of tapas could not!

 

 

 

We have our lessons in this. Counting of years rarely matter. It is

about what you gather by being in the company of good people (this

includes all that imparts goodness, including knowledge acquired by

reading etc). What one does in a 100 year life span must be worthy of

lasting for 1000s of years. That is what happened to people (sages) of

Staya yuga.

 

 

 

At another level, what we gain in an entire life time may be had in

few years' satsangam. By sat sangam, we, in this age of Kali may gain

values and knowledge that can otherwise be got in 1000 years. Such is

the greatness of satsangam. Such is the implication of living for

long!

 

 

 

But the true nature of this is something which even Maharishis may

not have known. Bhagawan conveys this in BG 10-2 – " Neither the host

of gods nor the great seers know my Prabhavam." This word, prabhavam,

connotes various meanings at various levels but suffice it to say that

the way of His creation at the bottom-most layer of yuga

classification is something that is bound to be as ever – a mystery.

 

-------------

with regards,

jayasree saranathan

 

On 1/11/07, Vijayaraghavan Chakravarthy <vijayaraghavan_s (AT) hotmail (DOT) com> wrote:

> Dear Shri Sadagopan Swami:

>

> I believe in Lord Rama. He is everything to us. However, I do not see that

> we can justify any of the numbers in the Vaalmeeki Ramayanam. For eg.:

> Dasaratha lived for 60000 years. In each direction "pala aayiram kotigal"

> Vaanaras were sent in search of Sita. I have come to the conclusion that

> we should not justify or worry about these numbers as they are not central

> to Ramayana. It is enough for me know that Rama & Ramayana are real

> eventhough many of the details are exaggerated or mystified.

>

> S. Vijayaraghavan

> Buffalo/NY

>

>

>

>

>

> >