ramayan or mahabharat

[deepak22]

which came first ?

ramayan or mahabharat?

because in ramayan there is no mention of KRISHNA and in mahabharat there is no mention of RAM . even peoples said that ramayan came first then why there is no mention of it in mahabharat???

[kimfelix]

Very complex question that depends on whether or not you think that either text has been added to after its initial composition. The Mahabharata does mention Rama on a number of occasions and includes a summary of the story, the Ramopakhyana. There is also an incident in which Bhima encounters Hanuman (who is his half brother), which indicates an awareness of the Ramayana story. So on this basis one would have to say that the Ramayana is earlier, which is I think in line with the traditional Hindu view. Modern scholars vary in their opinion and most seem to think that they were composed at about the same time, perhaps two thousand years ago.

[kaisersose]

 

which came first ?

ramayan or mahabharat?

because in ramayan there is no mention of KRISHNA and in mahabharat there is no mention of RAM . even peoples said that ramayan came first then why there is no mention of it in mahabharat???

 

That is not correct. The Mahabharata does mention Rama and Hanuman.

 

Chronologically, the Rama avatar happened before the Krishna avatar. Obviously, we cannot find Krishna in the Ramayana. From an academic perspective, the present Valmiki Ramayana is much newer (7th century AD) than the Mahabharata text. But the story of Rama is older.

 

Madhvacharya rejected the present version of Ramayana as not authentic.

 

Cheers

[kimfelix]

Academic views will inevitably vary but I think most scholars would date the Valmiki Ramayana to an earlier date than 7th century AD. Most writers suggest that the earlier portions date from around 250BC and the later additions were added up to the 4th century AD. But it is impossible to be conclusive on such matters because there is so little real evidence to go on.

[kaisersose]

 

Academic views will inevitably vary but I think most scholars would date the Valmiki Ramayana to an earlier date than 7th century AD. Most writers suggest that the earlier portions date from around 250BC and the later additions were added up to the 4th century AD. But it is impossible to be conclusive on such matters because there is so little real evidence to go on.

 

As I recall, the Valkimi Ramayana is written completely in classical sanskrit and is more homogenous indicating it was written in a short period of time.

 

On the other hand, the Mahabharata has several "layers" with some portions written in pre-panian archaic sanskrit and the rest written in post-panian classical sanskrit. So the Mahabharata has a wider range of several generations of authorship. I also recall the text acknowledges multiple layers by stating the original number of verses and then the gradual increase to 80000 or so verses.

 

Cheers

[kimfelix]

Some academic theories are I think based on linguistic arguments but they are invariably inconclusive as the division between different styles is rarely clear cut. Regarding the Ramayana, a number of authors, notably John Brockington, have suggested that it was originally a secular hero epic that was later converted into a religious text through the ascribing of a divine identity to Rama. On this basis it is usually suggested that Books 1 and 7, the Balakanda and Uttarakanda, are later.

 

There are different styles of Sanskrit in the Mahabharata but nothing so clear cut as to give an obvious indication of chronological layers. Again John Brockington is quite emphatic that such layers can be identified on the basis of text critical evidence, but nothing has been proven. Alf Hiltebeitel from Chicago University recently referred to these scholarly endeavours as 'myth-making'. So who knows?

[mahak]

According to mahaksa purana, Mahabharata was first, and Ramayana was retold when Janamejaya was wondering about the monkey king mentioned in context of Bhimas adventure.

 

However, outside the mahaksa purana, perhaps a scholar could figure the timeline concerning the appearance of the authors, Sri Valmiki and Srila Vyasadeva. Valmiki recited ramayana to Kusa and Lava, the sons of Lord Rama, while Srimati Sitadevi was living in His asrama (Valmiki"s). This was approximately 800,000 years ago, whereas the adventures of mahabharata took place all during Dvarapa Yuga, which happened between 800,000 and 5,000 years ago. All the heroes were of physical stature indicating they were only from Dvarapa era (between 10 and 18 feet tall). There were a few giants (over 20 feet tall) still alive during Dwarapa Yuga, survivors of Lord Rama's time (Treta Yuga), such as Sri Muchukunda, who considered even the very large (by our present standard) Dwarapa Yuga denizens like pygmies.

 

So, even though the Ramayana was recited to Janamejaya after Mahabharata, it is likely that Ramayana was composed during Treta Yuga, predating all the events desrcibed in mahabharata, other than, of course, the stories of bygone ages told in mahabharata (Shakuntala, Rsnaragna, the activities of the various gods and goddesses, etc.) The events of Ramayana happened during treta, the events of mahabharata during dwarapa.

 

Haribol, ys, mahaksadasa

[saurabhupadhyay3]

 

which came first ?

ramayan or mahabharat?

because in ramayan there is no mention of KRISHNA and in mahabharat there is no mention of RAM . even peoples said that ramayan came first then why there is no mention of it in mahabharat???

 

yes there is mention of ramayana in mahabharat remember:

1. flag on the chariot of arjun has hanumanji.

2. when bhim became angary during there exile he meets the hanumanji and hanumanji tells him that he will be there for helping pandavs during the great war of mahabharat.

[Sephiroth]

 

That is not correct. The Mahabharata does mention Rama and Hanuman.

 

Madhvacharya rejected the present version of Ramayana as not authentic.

 

 

Actually, you're wrong. Mahabratha have mentioned Hanuman TWICE.

 

First meeting of Bhisma and Hanuman was during the 14 years exile. The brothers and Draupadi was walking through a forest when they came across what appears to be a large tail across the path. The source for this tail was an elderly looking monkey which sat down and meditate. Everyone thought it was a rakshaha so they dispatched Bhisma to handle it (since he was the strongest one).

 

Bhisma, sensing that the Old Monkey had a sense of divinity to it request it to remove the tail. The Monkey stated back that it was in meditation and Bhisma can remove the tail on his own (without dishonoring the Monkey). Bhisma tried to remove it by pushing it with his feet but he failed. He tried to lift it up and also failed. He tried with everything and failed as well. So, knowing that it is impossible for any normal Monkey to be so powerful, he humbled himself and asked who the Monkey was and the Monkey revealed himself to be Hanuman, sitting there chanting and meditating upon Sri Rama (His Lord).

 

The second mentioning of Hanuman was in the Kurushektra war itself. When the war started, Hanuman came down to the battlefield, and sat in the flag of the chariot driven by Sri Krishna, giving roar now and then which weakens the enemies' spirit.

 

Who is Madhvacharya?