Talk:Ravana

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Wikiproject_Hinduism This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hinduism, an attempt to promote better coordination, content distribution, and cross-referencing between pages dealing with Hinduism. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
??? This article has not been rated yet on the quality scale.

Contents

[edit] Since when did Ravanda had multiple arms

I thought he only had multiple heads

[edit] "evil" and "demon"?

It seems that describing Ravana "evil" and calling him a "demon" is hardly neutral. It is merely the view expressed in Ramayana. Ravana is viewed in many parts of the world as a good king and a scholar (as the article does metion). Thus it seems that the article is a Rama-centric view of Ravana.

The page could be edited to indicate the following:
1. Ravana is viewed by some, including Rama devotees, as a symbol of evil.
2. Many view Ravana as a good king and the destruction of Lanka as wanton.
3. Moralizing such "piety without virtue is useless" should be avoided in the Ravana article. If that was Valmiki's opinion, then it must be cited with source. The article is not supposed to be an editorial on Ravana. I can equally well write "Rama's lesson teaches us that even if we indulge in gratuitous violence by burning down an entire island, some people may build temples for us." But such opinions, as all will agree, do not belong in the article.

In vast regions of South and Southeast Asia, the "evil" painting of Ravana is considered as a modern continuation of an ancient lame attempt at cultural superiority. The portrayal of Ravana in this article doeesn't seem to be neutral.

--Poda 22:53, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

There. Now are you happy?
elvenscout742 20:03, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)


l. In which countries is Ravana viewed as good? In Thailand, and Indonesia and all parts of the world, Ravana is viewed as evil in their versions of ramayana. So it's not just an Indian point of view. see below discussion of why Ravana is considered to be a bad person.

Mr. Poda makes a statement without showing support. If he has specific countries in mind, please add.

Raj2004 14:01, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

Wrong in Sri Lanka we know that Ravana is a good Man.

For a November 2004 deletion debate over this talk page see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Talk:Ravana

King Ravana of Sri Lanka is well-known in myth and legend and the story of Rama and Sita as told in the epic poem, the Indian Ramayana, which is depicted in theatre and dance in India, Thailand, and on the island of Bali in Indonesia all demonize Ravana as the evil demon who was vanquished by the hero, Rama, revered throughout India to this day as a god.

The fact of the matter is that king Ravana was a remarkable monarch, so remarkable that he is part of the folklore of Sri Lanka where the humblest villager in the remotest hamlet respects his memory as a beneficent human being, neither a god nor a demon.

The ‘demonization’ of a formidable adversary who was defeated because of the treachery of his brother, Vibhushana, who betrayed him and changed sides is the substance of the epic poem. That paved the way to making Rama of Ayodhya a hero and a god and a part of the Hindu pantheon. The utter destruction visited upon the Island of Sri Lanka almost erased the memory of its greatest king, Ravana, and it is his story, reconstructed from fragments that survive in the memory of this Island’s inhabitants.

In South and Southeast Asia the legend of Râvana, demon-king of Sri Lanka is very much alive – and well! But then, is it legend? Or is it truth twisted by time and circumstance into myth and legend?

You could walk into the humblest home in the remotest hamlet in Sri Lanka and find echoes of king Ravana. Tales of his prowess as a greatly renowned physician; his inventive genius as an aeronaut; his courage as a brave warrior and his graciousness as an outstanding gentleman are legion.

He is credited with going all the way to Ayodhya in the Valley of the Ganges to abduct and bring back the alluringly beautiful Sita, wife of Rama, the legendary god-king of Bharath, (India).

Across the wide expanse of the Indian Ocean, in Thailand and Kampuchea and on the Island of Bali in the Indonesian archipelago, the story immortalized by Valmiki in his epic poem, the Ramayana forms the core element of the cultures of these countries as expressed in their exquisite dance-theatre.

Myth or legend? Fiction? I think not.

Here is a great warrior-king who terrorized his enemies, a genius in his day and age who bestrode his island kingdom like a colossus. His exploits were many and hence, indelibly fixed in the minds of simple, ordinary people of whom he is well beloved and no ‘demon’ as made out by the writer of the poem, Valmiki, two thousand years after the alleged happenings in his epic version of the events. This story, which became a folk-tale has been retold for perhaps, hundreds of generations in an oral tradition that goes back at least four thousand years – and that’s a lot of time during which a tale could have been embroidered in the telling and re-telling as little details were added or forgotten according to the imagination and skill of the teller of tales.

According to scholars researching antiquity and reconstructing the past, Râvana lived in 2,357 BCE.[1] That’s a long, long time ago and obscured by the significant lack of written records that have survived to the present era. Folk tales and poems or stories written thousands of years after the events are all we have to go on but the collective memory of human beings has endured the ravages of time and circumstance and helps us to believe that there is a core of ineradicable truth to the fact that such a remarkable individual did, indeed, live once upon a time.

How advanced was the world at that time? According to a passage in the Rig-veda, 2 describing the war between the Suras and Asuras3 chillingly describe an unbelievable event: “They hurled their shining shafts at each other. When the shafts hit the earth, they exploded with the light of a million suns, blinding the sight of men. A huge cloud of smoke rose and became a giant umbrella, then, it rained and after several moons, the marrow in men’s bones turned to water.”

To any modern person familiar with the happenings of the Nuclear Age, this is an ancient description of a massive and devastating nuclear war, a cataclysmic event that all but ended the civilization of that time. Is there any other rational explanation?

[Those descriptions could also refer to lightning and volcanic eruptions, or possibly an asteroid or comet impact. India is in sailing reach of Indonesia, where there are many destructive volcanoes. Anthony Appleyard 11:17, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)]

Is it possible that in the war between Rama and Ravana that the final outcome was decided with nuclear weapons?

We all know that one of the places where Sita was confined is Sita Eliya, near Nuwara Eliya. It is also a fact that the entire area around Nuwara Eliya has a black soil, cinder-like and totally infertile; to a depth of 25 to 75 centimeters and that the site of Lake Gregory today could be a huge crater, much like the crater caused by a nuclear detonation at ground level. The black soil could be nuclear ash. It is also a fact that the curious Moon Plains is pockmarked by craters. Gold was panned here in the Nineteenth century and it is entirely possible that the area contains tektites or minerals fused under extreme heat like that of a nuclear explosion close to the ground.

Another curious thing is that the subterranean cave system behind the Ella Falls (Ravana Ella Falls) is said to be connected to the Isthripura cave system at Uva Paranagama, near Welimada, and that this cave system ends near the banks of the Mahaveli Ganga at Mahiyangana! For speleologists, this is an underground paradise to explore. What, if anything did Ravana fear from the sky that impelled him to explore, plan, expand and construct a vast subterranean system? Was it to escape the ‘shining shafts?’

Nuwara Eliya is known to us as the ‘City of Light’ and was, until the British discovered it, a gently rolling plateau inhabited by a large population of wild elephants. There is nor record of human habitation. Why, then the ‘City of Light?” Was this the place of the ‘light of a million suns?’ Perhaps some scientific investigations of soil radioactivity could reveal a part of the intriguing mystery that surrounds this place.

Hakgala, south of Nuwara Eliya and the site of an exotic botanic garden, is a three peaked mountain much like a jaw-tooth, hence its name: Jaw-tooth Rock or mountain. King Râvana is said to have had a medicinal herb garden here and is also said to have tested his famous ‘Dandu-monara’ aircraft. Research has shown that the wind currents hereabouts are ideal for gliding across the entire Uva Valley and up to Namunukula, the mountain of nine peaks that overshadows Badulla like some long extinct and brooding volcano.

Then, in Wyamba is to be found a rural township called ‘Wariyapola” which means, strangely enough, ‘airport!’

[Many peoples have legends of men or gods flying. See vimana for a way that suich legelds may have arisen in India. Anthony Appleyard 11:17, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)]

In Bandarawela, on the way to Badulla, is a place known as ‘Bindunuwewa’ which means the place where the reservoir bund was smashed or breached. An incurable curiosity led me to question an old villager who told me that a huge area of the Uva Valley round and about Bandarawela was an enormous lake or väva and that during the war between Rama and Ravana that Hanuman, the monkey god4 cleft the bund in two and millions of liters of water rushed through the breach and barreled its way north towards the almost flat site of Badulla town, where it settled. It is also true that when one travels to Badulla from Bandarawela that the sides of the narrow pass through which one goes are scraped down to bedrock... Myth, legend or fact?

It is also strange that excavations on a hillside at Bandarawela overlooking the hospital revealed fish-hooks amongst other items. Fishing hooks on a dry hillside or was this once upon a time, a lakeside settlement? The vista below lends credence to the väva story.

To this day leading and reputable ayurvedic or deshiya-vaidhyya5 physicians will tell you that their pharmacopeias utilizes herbal and mineral remedies attributed to King Râvana.

Yes, indeed, questions seeking answers. If you are intrigued enough by the story of Râvana, then you might want to dig deeper. Who knows what you might discover?

Was Ravana really a 'demon' or was it a degratory term used to elevate Rama beyond his stature?


The following statement: "Here is a great warrior-king who terrorized his enemies, a genius in his day and age who bestrode his island kingdom like a colossus. His exploits were many and hence, indelibly fixed in the minds of simple, ordinary people of whom he is well beloved and no ‘demon’ as made out by the writer of the poem, Valmiki, two thousand years after the alleged happenings in his epic version of the events. This story, which became a folk-tale has been retold for perhaps, hundreds of generations in an oral tradition that goes back at least four thousand years – and that’s a lot of time during which a tale could have been embroidered in the telling and re-telling as little details were added or forgotten according to the imagination and skill of the teller of tales" can be said of contemporary tyrants.

For example, the same can be said of Hitler. He was a warrior-king who terroized his enemies and was fixed in the minds of Germans. It doesn't convice me that Ravana was necessarily benevolent.

[edit] Even a Tyrant may have some good qualities but still is a bad person.

The fact is that even if a bad tyrant has some good qualities does not mean that he is not overall a bad person. Some, for example, communists may say Stalin was good for his reforms but it does not exonerate him to such extent that he is indeed a good person. Hitler is another example. Hitler was an evil man although some say that he helped Germany recover economically. Also, Lord Ram only invaded Lanka after diplomatic efforts failed. Second, Vibhushana, was not treacherous and fled in order to avoid being killed by Ravana for opposing him. even if one argues he was treacherous, to stand idle in face of evil is to support evil. That's why he is praised as symbol of righteousness. Karna, despite having some good qualities, is faulted for siding with Duryudhana even though he knew the Pandavas' cause was just. This shows the contrast between Karna and Vibesshana. That's why it was proper for him to oppose Ravana. It is uncontested that Ravana abducted Rama's wife, Sita Devi and no amount of glorification can exonerate Ravana on that point.

Same with Duryudhona in the Mahabharata. He had some good qualities and was a great warrior even though he was overall on the whole, a bad person. Bhima, on the other hand, had some bad qualities but he was overall a good person.

Human beings are complicated creatures and show shades of gray. One should look at the overall character to determine whether he is a good person or bad.

Also, the Allies in world war II bombed dresden and did bad acts but overall they were the 'good' guys. To say wanton destruction of Lanka is an unfair characterization. In any war, even a just war, cities will get destroyed. Raj2004 3 July 2005 13:17 (UTC)

[edit] Notion of Ravana as good is recent byproduct mostly of Dravidian movement

Many people in the south elevated Ravana as good as part of the Dravidian movement which feared domination from the North. see http://www.frontlineonnet.com/fl2012/stories/20030620003609800.htm also, even in Thailand and Bali's version of Ramayana view Ravana as a bad man.

second, one reader in rediff, site, http://mboard.rediff.com/board/board.php?boardid=news2005jun13sai&page=4 said the following about Ravana: "(One writer, Sivaswamy, sic) He should have some basic knowledge of Dravidian movement (which is limited to Tamil Nadu). Only this movement has attempted to idolize Ravana, merely because: Ravana is supposedly a "Southerner" (he was King of Sri Lanka which has long ceased to be part of India, anyway). Rama was a "northerner" and on top of it an "aryan" and therefore for a Dravidian movement there is a pathological hatred against Rama. What is forgotten and surprising too, is that in this process this Dravidian Movement which has been attempting to idealise Ravana (only to spite the Northerners and the Believers) forgets conveniently that Ravana was also a Brahmin! How come then that this brahmin haters have turned to become a brahmin lover (only in the case of Ravana?)."

Just to give a Neutral point of view.

Raj2004 3 July 2005 18:52 (UTC)

[edit] Ravana is evil in ayya-vazhi

Besides standard Hindu scriptures, the Tamil Hindu sect, Ayya Vazhi considers Ravana as a personification of evil. Please see Thretha Yukam

Raj2004 00:07, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

Raj2004, are you saying you want to alter the article to show Ravan's evil side up more? If so, you can count on my support in the matter, as long as it does not revert ultimately to what it was before I came along. I personally don't buy anything in the Ramayana as hard fact, so I think he's just an evil demon, who some see as good so I added their view in. elvenscout742 02:20, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

Not necessarily, elven But to say ramayana is biased towards him is an unfair statement. even a tyrant may have some good qualities.

elven, what I am saying that we should not try to present Ravana as if he was a good person, like Jesus Christ or Krishna. He may have had some good qualties but he was overall bad. (also see Ramayana bashing, http://www.vnn.org/editorials/ET0012/ET25-6471.html I don't think the article does that. In fact, many Hindus may feel offended by the tone. It would be like stating the the Bible is hopelessly biased against Lucifer or Satan. Satan was once an angel but then became evil. In which countries is Ravana viewed as good? In Thailand, and Indonesia and all parts of the world, Ravana is viewed as evil in their versions of ramayana. So it's not just an Indian point of view. Also, to say Ramayana is mythical may be questionable. Christians would be offended if we say the Bible is mythical.

Also, Ravana was known for his excessive lust. He had raped Rambha, an aspara, http://www.mythfolklore.net/india/weeks/week05/readingb.htm as well as Vaidhehi. He was known for various misdeeds and was cursed by many. Just do a google search of Ravana and cursed.

The article's tone may appear to present him as a morally ambivalent figure, neither good or bad, sort of like a Pontius Pilate type of figure or at worst a good king. Second, according to the Bhagavata purana, there's a similar satan-like story. Ravana, according to that account was the incarnation of Jaya, the gatekeeper at Vaikunta, the abode of Vishnu and was cursed to be born as Ravana.

The story is roughly as follows:

Two pious devotees named Jaya and Vijaya and Sri Vishnu had appointed Vijaya doorkeepers. They felt that they were the chosen doorkeepers of Vaikunta and were always very near the Supreme Lord Narayana. > So they grew haughty. Once it so happened that four > boy-saints named Sanaka, Sanandana, Sanatkumara and > Sanatsujata came to pay homage to Sri Vishnu. > Because of their great yogic power, they could enter > Vaikunta. Jaya and Vijaya puffed up with arrogance > stopped them. The saints were angry and cursed them. > They said, "You are so very near the Lord, and yet > you are ignorant. Until you get supreme knowledge, > wander in the world below." Then the two doorkeepers > came to their senses. Trembling with sorrow, they > prayed to Sri Narayana. He said to them, "These are > men of pure piety and great self-control. Their > words must come true. Go to the earth below; come > back when you have gained wisdom." Then they wept > before the Lord saying, "What will > be our fate if through ignorance we forget God > Himself?" Narayana took pity on them and offered to > mitigate the curse. He said, "Jaya and Vijaya, which > will you choose - to be my devotees in seven births > or my enemies in three births?" They agreed to three births t to be enemies of Vishnu. > > Then they fell from Vaikunta and were born as twin > Rakshasas, Hiranyakasipu and Hiranyaksha. They were > the enemies of God and of the way to God. Vishnu > assumed the form of Varaha and Narasimha and killed > them both. > After this in Tretha yuga they were born as Ravana and > Kumbhakarna and were killed by Rama. Then in Dwapara > they were born as Shishupala and Dantavakra, and Sri > Krishna killed them. So then they were freed from the > curse." from a web site retelling the version, http://hindubooks.org


Vishnu, in order to show mercy, since they wanted to get back to Heaven as soon as possible permitted their birth as tyrants. So it's like the fall of Satan. Satan was the greatest angel of God before he fell.

Raj2004 13:50, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

== >

Ravana not evil ==

Ravana was simply a king never evil the story made him to be like that becuase that how you like to show your enmy evil right? Many sri lankans today even know that ravan was a REAl king who ruled sri lanka in trincolmalee The stroy writers wanted to make ravana seems bad in reality he was a good man. SO belive that sita was ravana wife before she was rama's.

[edit] Lanka of the Ramayana may not be present-day Sri Lanka

Why are so many people concluding that the today's Sri Lanka is the Lanka of the Ramayana? There is no evidence to suggest that this is the case.

Yes the bridge of rama bits can be seen today so they belive that lanka reffers to sri lanka.

"bridge of rama"? Please don't confuse myth with reality.

You'll find that Myth is often merely embellished reality, There may have been a crossing on Rama's/Adam's bridge by humans at some point, and depending on the time period it may have even had some other "Early Man" species in the army (no doubt to a Homo Sapien Human an earlier species of Man would have looked more ape like) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 138.88.47.25 (talk) 16:58, 14 March 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Ravana

Asura actually refers to anyone who acts evil ro does ruthless things the indian poet just portrays ravana as evil because ravana at that time was trying to conqueor india also Sita was not raped or anyhitng she was kept under guard and safe and the only reason ravana did steal her was becuase Lakshaman cut off her nose.

You seem confused. If Asura refers to any evildoer, what about Varuna and Mitra ? They are actually a specific race of celestial races, amongst whom Ravana is not counted because he was half Rakshasa and half Brahmana. Also, Lakshmana cut of Surpanaka's nose, not Sita's (you appear to be implying the latter). Nowhere in the article does it state as a fact that Sita was raped either - after she was rescued, some of Rama's subjects began to become suspicious of her and spread rumours that she might not have been chaste. --Grammatical error 20:11, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ravana and Jain Religion

As per Jain Religion, Ravana is God for Jain. Will anybody clearify? vkvora 15:01, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

      • As per the Jain religion , Ravana is currently in hell, but a few thousand years from now he will be reborn as a Tirthankar
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../r/a/v/Talk%7ERavana_ca8d.html"