Tuesday, 7 February 2017

Clothing During The Mahabharatha/Ramayana Times in Ancient India

In a previous article, I had claimed that in Ancient India, toplessness was prevalent. Although men and women would wear a lower garment, a proper upper garment was usually not worn. Exceptions to this sometimes existed for the wealthy and the royalty, but even then it was quite rare to find them wear an upper garment. This post is dedicated to providing references from both epics, Mahabharatha and Ramayana, to support these claims. I will first start off with the clothing in the Mahabharatha, and then move on to discuss the clothing in the Valmiki Ramayana.

Clothing in Mahabharatha

During Mahabharatha times, upper garments were worn sometimes by the royalty or the wealthy. After Duryodhana wins the Pandavas and Draupadi, Karna orders the garments of the Pandavas and Draupadi to be removed. Hearing this order, the Pandavas remove their upper garments and sit down in the assembly (Sabha Parva Section LXVII):
Whatever wealth the Pandavas had--she herself and these Pandavas themselves,--have all been justly won by the son of Suvala. O Dussasana, this Vikarna speaking words of (apparent) wisdom is but a boy. Take off the robes of the Pandavas as also the attire of Draupadi. Hearing these words the Pandavas, O Bharata, took of their upper garments and throwing them down sat in that assembly.
This shows that royalty during Mahabharatha times would wear upper garments. The removal of the upper garments of the Pandavas signified loss of royalty, and that is why Karna ordered the Pandavas and Draupadi to remove these garments. Since the Pandavas and Draupadi were then slaves, they had no right to wear upper garments and show that they were still royalty.

However, this was rare. In other words, most royalty described in the epic were shown to not wear an upper garment. An excellent example of this would be Kunti. When her son Arjuna was performing great feats in the rangbhoomi (prior to Karna's sudden arrival there), she was overjoyed, and tears of happiness from her eyes fell from her face onto her breasts and mixed with her breast milk (Adi Parva Section CXXXVII):
 "On seeing Arjuna, the whole assembly were delighted and conchs began to be blown all around with other musical instruments. And there arose a great uproar in consequence of the spectators' exclaiming,--'This is the graceful son of Kunti!'--'This is the middle (third) Pandava!'--'This is the son of the mighty Indra!'--'This is the protector of the Kurus'--'This is the foremost of those versed in arms!'--'This is the foremost of all cherishers of virtue!'--'This is the foremost of the persons of correct behaviour, the great repository of the knowledge of manners!' At those exclamations, the tears of Kunti, mixing with the milk of her breast, wetted her bosom.
Since Kunti's tears could fall on her breast and mix with her breast milk, it becomes quite obvious that there was no upper garment covering her breasts. The Rangbhoomi happened in the open, in front of the masses in Hastinapura, suggesting that it was not common and not necessary for royalty to cover their breasts even in front of the public (i.e. toplessness was the norm). The few instances of royalty covering their breasts, were a rarity.

One can then raise the point that Kunti was a widow at the time of the quote I extracted above, and hence did not need to cover her breasts. People can therefore reason that married women in royalty had to cover their breasts, but widowed women in royalty did not have to. However, that is also incorrect. After the 13th year of the Pandavas and Draupadi's exile in Matsya desh was over, Draupadi was living as royalty. However, even then, it it described that she was not covering her upper body. In one instance, Draupadi was trying to convince Krishna to not sue for peace when he goes to Hastinapura as a peace messenger as she believed the Kurus did not deserve peace. At that time, she remembers the insults she faced in the Kuru Sabha at Hastinapura and laments. It is then that Vyasa describes her tears and falling on her breasts and wetting them. This would not be possible if she had an upper garment covering these breasts, suggesting that Draupadi did not wear upper garments even once she returned to living as royalty, after the 13 year exile period had finished (Udyoga Parva Section LXXXII):
Uttering these words with voice choked in tears, the large-eyed Krishna began to weep aloud, with convulsive sobs, and tears gushed down her cheeks. And that lady, with hips full and round, began to drench her close and deep bosom by the tears she shed which were hot as liquid fire.
This suggests that even married women that were royalty did not have to wear, and usually did not wear upper garments.

Now I will show a few instances where commoners did not wear upper garments. After the Pandavas and Draupadi were sent to exile, Krishna soon came to meet them. It was there that Draupadi remembered the insult done to her and began to weep. Her tears fell on her breast and wet them, suggesting that she did not have an upper garment covering her breasts, at the time she was a commoner living in exile (Vana Parva Section XII):
'Saying this the mild-speeched Krishna hid her face with her soft hands like the buds of lotus, and began to weep. And the tears of Panchali begot of grief washed her deep, plump and graceful breasts crowned with auspicious marks.
Also note that Vyasa describes Draupadi's breasts as having auspicious marks. How could he have noted that they had these auspicious marks had he not seen her bare, naked breasts? This further supports my claim that commoners during Mahabharatha time did not cover their upper body.

During the final year of exile, in Matsya desh, Kichaka (brother in law of king Virata) sees Draupadi and gets mesmerized by her beauty. He describes her beauty in the following manner (Virata Parva Section XIV):
Both thy bosoms, so beautiful and well-developed and endued with unrivalled gracefulness and deep and well-rounded and without any space between them, are certainly worthy of being decked with garlands of gold. Resembling in shape the beautiful buds of the lotus, these thy breast, O thou of fair eye-brows, are even as the whips of Kama that are urging me forward, O thou of sweet smiles, O damsel of slender waist, beholding that waist of thine marked with four wrinkles and measuring but a span, and slightly stooping forward because of the weight of thy breasts, and also looking on those graceful hips of thine broad as the banks of a river, the incurable fever of desire, O beauteous lady, afflicteth me sore.
As you can see from the text above, Kichaka describes Draupadi's breasts as resembling the buds of a lotus and not having any space between them. Such details would only be visible had he seen the bare, naked breasts of Draupadi. Otherwise, how is a man able to tell if there is any space or not between the breasts of a woman who is wearing a blouse that has her breasts covered?

So, from these references, I have shown that in Mahabharatha times, the commoners would not cover their upper body. Upper body was only covered sometimes by the royalty and wealthy to signify their status. But even this was quite rare. Now I will move on to clothing in Ramayana times.

Clothing in Ramayana

The clothing in Ramayana times was quite similar to that in Mahabharatha times (in terms of the body parts that were covered). After all, there is only a 100 year gap between the two epics.

When Seetha is in her 14th year of exile, Ravana approaches her in the garb of a brahmin. He describes Seetha in the following manner (3.46.20-22):
विशालम् जघनम् पीनम् ऊरू करि कर उपमौ |एतौ उपचितौ वृत्तौ संहतौ संप्रगल्भितौ || ३-४६-१९पीन उन्नत मुखौ कान्तौ स्निग्ध ताल फल उपमौ |मणि प्रवेक आभरणौ रुचिरौ ते पयो धरौ || ३-४६-२० 
"Your hips are beamy, thighs burly akin to elephant's trunks, and these two breasts of yours that are ornamented with best jewellery are rotund, rubbing and bumping each other, and they are swinging up and up, their nipples are brawny and jutting out, and they are smoothish like palm-fruits, thus they are covetable for they are beautiful. [3-46-19, 20] 
चारु स्मिते चारु दति चारु नेत्रे विलासिनि |मनो हरसि मे रामे नदी कूलम् इव अंभसा || ३-४६-२१करान्तमित मध्या असि सुकेशी संहत स्तनी | 
"Oh, allurer, your smile is alluring, teeth are alluring, and your eyes allure, oh, beauty, your waist is palmful, your hair velvety, your breasts are jostling, and you rob my soul as a spate robs riverbank. [3-46-21, 22a]
As you can see from Ravana's words above, he sees Seetha's breasts as rotund. He also notes them as rubbing and bumping against one another and swinging up and up. Furthermore, he notes the texture of Seetha's nipples. To describe those body parts in such detail, he must have had a good look at them, which would only be possible if they were not covered up. How does one realize a woman's breasts are rubbing against one another if they are covered up by a blouse? All in all, this text suggests that the upper body of women in Ramayana time was not covered. The text also states that Ravana describes Seetha's thighs as burly, suggesting that he would have also had a good look at them. Since later sections that describe her kidnap show that she was wearing silk garments when kidnapped, this description can be explained as follows. Seetha's lower body was covered with the silk garment, but her upper body was not fully covered. When Ravana approached her, she tried to seduce him by moving around in such a way that would attract him to her. For example, she moved in such a way that her breasts swung up and up and attract Ravana to her. She also highlighted the beauty of her hips, and waist to Ravana through her actions, and gave a big, heart-piercing smile to Ravana. The smile was so big that her teeth were exposed, allowing Ravana to describe them. In the attempt to seduce Ravana, she also moved the silk garment covering her thighs on the side, thereby allowing her bare, naked thighs to be exposed to Ravana's view. This would explain the description of her thighs as burly, given by Ravana in the verses above. I will talk more about this in a future article, where I will discuss Seetha's kidnap/elopement by/with Ravana.

During Seetha's time in Lanka, despite all her embellishments while residing in the Ashoka Vatika like royalty, she did not cover her upper body, suggesting that rakshasiis too would not cover their upper body. This is shown by the way Seetha laments when she finds out Indrajit had defeated Rama and Lakshmana and had made them unconscious. Initially, after Indrajita had defeated Rama and Lakshmana by making them fall on the ground, he thought that they both were dead. So he returned to his father Ravana with joy and told him all that had happened. Ravana was extremely happy and ordered the rakshasiis that were protecting Seetha to show Rama and Lakshmana's dead body on the battle field, using the Pushpaka Vimana. It was then that Seetha lamented seeing the (dead) bodies of Rama and Lakshmana. She lamented by saying that how could her husband die, despite her having all the auspicious marks? She then goes on to describe the auspicious marks on her body to Trijata, a rakshasii protecting her. She says (6.48.11):
स्तनौ च अविरलौ पीनौ मम इमौ मग्न चूचुकौ |मग्ना च उत्सन्गिनी नाभिह् पार्श्व उरस्कम् च मे चितम् || ६-४८-११
"My breasts are close to each other, fully developed and have depressed nipples. My navel is deeply idented. My flanks and bossom are well-formed."
As we can see from the verse above, she tells Trjata that her breasts are close to one another and have depressed nipples. In cultures where the breasts are covered, this would come across as very awkard, as breasts would be linked to shame in those cultures. Exposing or talking about breasts would be as awkward as is a man talking about his penis in modern day culture/societies. Since we don't see a feeling of awkwardness in Trijata upon hearing Seetha's words, it suggests that not covering the breasts was the norm among rakshasiis as well. Furthermore, upon Ravana's death, Mandodari rushes out of the palace, to the battlefield where she sees her dead husband's body. She then laments, and her tears moisten her breasts, suggesting that her breasts were not covered (6.111.92):
इत्येवमुच्यमाना सा सशब्दं प्ररुदोद ह || ६-१११-९२
स्नापयन्ती तदास्रेण स्तनौ वक्त्रं सुनिर्मलम् |

While they were consoling thus, Mandodari, moistening her breasts and her spotless face in tears, wept aloud at that moment.

So, even in Ramayana times, in both Aryan and Rakshasa communities, leaving the upper body uncovered was the norm. Sometimes, the garment covering the lower body extended long enough, and was thrown over the shoulder to form a temporary Uttariya (upper garment). However, a proper upper garment was not worn in those times. This is displayed in the image on the left. Note how the lower garment extends long enough to be grasped by the left hand. This extension of the lower garment can also be thrown over the shoulder to form a temporary Uttariya.

This type of temporary Uttariya is worn by Draupadi, in the Sabha Parva. When Yuddhistira loses the gambling match, Draupadi is summoned to the Sabha by Duryodhana. At that time, she is described as wearing a single garment. When she is being dragged to the Sabha, she tells Dushasana (Sabha Parva Section LXVI):

And dragged by him, with body bent, she faintly cried--'Wretch! it ill behoveth thee to take me before the assembly. My season hath come, and I am now clad in one piece of attire.

Despite being clad in a single cloth, Draupadi was described as having an upper garment (Uttariya) that had loosened when Dushasana had dragged her (Sabha Parva Section LXVI):

Vaisampayana continued,--'Unto Krishna who was thus weeping and crying piteously, looking at times upon her helpless lord, Dussasana spake many disagreeable and harsh words. And beholding her who was then in her season thus dragged, and her upper garments loosened, beholding her in that condition which she little deserved, Vrikodara afflicted beyond endurance, his eyes fixed upon Yudhishthira, gave way to wrath."

The above passage uses the plural word "garments" instead of the singular word "garment". Does this mean Draupadi was wearing more than one garment, in the Sabha? My answer to this would be no, mostly because we have an ample of references even outside of Sabha Parva, where Draupadi was said to be wearing only one cloth when she was brought to the Sabha. I would explain the mention of the plural word "garments" in the above passage by drawing a parallel to a real life situation. If one was to tell his friend to take off his boxers (a single garment), he would say "take off your clothes", instead of "take off your cloth", simply because one has a habit of associating what someone is wearing with the plural form "clothes", instead of the singular form, "cloth". We never say "what cloth are you wearing", but rather, we say "what clothes are you wearing", even if we are referring to a single garment, like a shirt, for example. Hence, it is but natural for Vyasa to use the plural word "garments" when describing how Draupadi's single garment had loosened.

Now, since Draupadi was described as wearing a singe garment and an Uttariya, we can infer that this Uttariya was a portion of the single cloth she was wearing, that had also covered her lower body. Hence, the Uttariya she was wearing would appear to be the type of temporary Uttariya I had described above (this type of Uttariya is shown in the picture above).

In Ramayana, we find some evidence that Seetha was wearing this type of temporary Uttariya. During Seetha's kidnap, she takes this temporary Uttariya and wraps it around some of her ornaments and releases it to Surgiva and other Vanaras standing below (3.54.1-2):
ह्रियमाणा तु वैदेही कञ्चिन्नाथमपश्यती।
ददर्श गिरिशृङ्गस्थान्पञ्च वानरपुङ्गवान्।।3.54.1।।

While Sita was being kidnapped, she saw no one to protect her. Only five great monkeys stood on the top of a mountain.

तेषां मध्ये विशालाक्षी कौशेयं कनकप्रभम्।
उत्तरीयं वरारोहा शुभान्याभरणानि च।।3.54.2।।
मुमोच यदि रामाय शंसेयुरिति मैथिली।

Largeeyed, bright and beautiful Sita dropped her uttariya silk garment shining like gold and auspicious ornaments in their midst with a hope they may report this to Rama.
Had the Uttariya been a blouse or some other permanent cover of the upper body, the removing of this blouse would not have been possible without Ravana noticing it. However, as we know from Ramayana, Ravana never got to know about Seetha dropping her ornaments wrapped in her Uttariya (3.54.3), thereby suggesting that this Uttariya was not a blouse or a permanent upper body cover. It was most likely the temporary upper body cover (i.e. extension of lower body garment) that I had earlier described:
वस्त्रमुत्सृज्य तन्मध्ये निक्षिप्तं सहभूषणम्।।3.54.3।।
सम्भ्रमात्तु दशग्रीवस्तत्कर्म न स बुद्धवान्।

In his agitation Ravana failed to notice when Sita dropped down that garment along with ornaments in their midst.
When Jayadratha sees Draupadi during her period of exile, in Draupadi Harana Parva, he first sends Kotika to her. When Kotika approaches Draupadi, we see Draupadi arranging her upper silk garment (Uttariya). Below is the passage describing this, from Vana Parva Section 250 of the Critical Edition (translated by Bibek Debroy):
Vaishampayana said, ‘Then princess Droupadi replied to the question that the foremost of the Shibis had asked. She glanced gently and let go off the branch. She gathered her silken upper garment and replied, “O son of a king! I know in my heart that it is not proper for someone like me to address you thus. But there is no other man or woman here who can reply to your question. O fortunate one! I am alone here and must therefore, give my own reply.
Now, if the Uttariya that Draupadi was wearing was not a temporary upper garment, but rather a more permanent one, like a blouse that completely covered her upper body in a proper manner, would she be arranging/gathering it when a stranger approaches her? It would only make sense for her to gather and arrange an upper garment that is not properly covering her upper body and breasts. Such an Uttariya would fit the definition of a temporary Uttariya that I earlier described (which is the extension of a lower garment, thrown over the shoulder), instead of a permanent Uttariya like a blouse. Hence, from this reasoning, we can come to a conclusion that Draupadi was wearing a temporary Uttariya, like the one in the image above, during her period of exile.

I will end by posting an image of a carving from a 100 BCE (Sunga Era) temple in India, that depicts the kidnap of Seetha by Ravana. If you look carefully, you can notice Jatayu at the top left of the image. Also note the clothing of Seetha back then. Her upper body was uncovered, as I have shown was the ancient culture, countless times in this post. The ancients would adorn themselves heavily with jewelry, and that is evident from the image below as well:

Image result for sita kidnap carving


  1. Why seetha would moved her silk garment to seduce her bare naked thighs? What type image of seetha you are trying to portray, of seetha?

    1. I was going to talk about this in another post, but since you mentioned that here, I will talk a bit about it over here... There is much evidence that Seetha wanted to go to Lanka with Ravana:

      When Mareecha moved around the forest as a golden deer to attract Seetha, Seetha came outside her hut and started looking at the deer. Her body language was such that Valmiki described her as giving "intoxicating glances" to the deer (Aranaya Kanda Section 42 Verses 31b-32a). If she thought that the deer was an animal, why would she give such glances to the deer? Furthermore, Valmiki then goes on to describe her (when she is looking at the deer) by using the word "sushroni", meaning one with excellent hips, loin, and buttocks (Aranya Kanda Section 43 Verse 1). The clothes Seetha was wearing would have likely covered her lower body (below the hips). In that case, how was Valmiki able to describe her loin and buttocks? It is clear that she was trying to expose a bit more to attract the deer (whom she thought was a human) to herself...

      Then, she goes to Rama and asks him for the deer. Lakshmana quickly realizes that the deer is Mareecha, and therefore proposes to not go after the deer. But Seetha gives Rama a heart piercing smile (to convince Rama to do as she says) and cuts Lakshmana off. She proposes that Rama go after the deer. Valmiki says that Seetha was filled with fraud/deceit when she asked Rama to go after the deer (Aranya Kanda Section 43 Verse 9). This means that her actual reason for sending Rama after the deer was not for the deer. Sending Rama after the deer was a pretext for her to execute her greater plan...

      Then, Rama chases the deer. Once he gets tired, he shoots an arrow and kills it. While dying, the deer (Mareecha) calls out (imitating Rama's voice) to Lakshmana and Seetha for help... Seetha and Lakshmana both hear the voice. Lakshmana realizes right away that it is the voice of Mareecha and not Rama. But Seetha shows worry that it may be Rama's voice. In my opinion, this worry was simply acting done by her to try to get Lakshmana to leave the hut and go deep in the forest to find Rama. In other words she was not really worried, for the following reasons:

      1. After Ravana comes to meet her, she shows no worry that her husband is dead. Instead, she praises her husband's bravery to the skies in Aranya Kanda Sections 47-48. Had she thought her husband had died, she would not be praising her husband's bravery in that manner. She would have shown some sort of fear/worry for Rama's life. But that was not seen. It suggests that she knew her husband was safe. After all, this is the same Rama that single handedly killed Khara and Dushana. Why worry when Rama is fighting one Mareecha?

      2. When Seetha is kidnapped in Aranya Kanda Section 49, she calls out to Rama for help, and she asks Jatayu to tell Rama of her kidnap. That suggests that she knew that Rama was living at the time of her kidnap. Also, in Aranya Kanda Section 53 Verse 4, she says:

      "You black-hearted fiend, for sure, you alone sidelined my husband in a trickish guise of Golden Deer wishful to abduct me as you are a coward. [3-53-4]

      This suggests that she knew that the Golden deer was a trick by Ravana and that Mareecha (the golden deer) had not killed Rama. But Ravana had gave no hint during his conversation with Seetha (Aranya Kanda Sections 46-49) that the golden deer was sent by him to drive Rama away from the hut. So how did Seetha know that?

      It becomes quite obvious that she knew from the very beginning (even prior to Ravana's arrival) that the deer was sent by Ravana for her and that the deer had not killed Rama.

      This comment is getting long so I will continue it in another comment. I will start by continuing my talk about Seetha and Lakshmana's conversation, where she "forces" him to go after Rama.

      To be continued...

    2. If this is written in Aranya kanda by valmiki then what shown in Epic Ramayan serials kind off, is manipulated? What could be the reason for seetha to go along Ravan?

      Do Ravan really forces seetha or seetha herself wanted to go?

      Anyways, will wait for your next blog!

    3. There is no doubt Ravan was not less in terms of his might of power as well in terms of his spiruality and knowledge!

    4. Continuation from Part 1...

      It becomes quite obvious that Seetha knew from the very beginning (even prior to Ravana's arrival) that the deer was sent by Ravana for her and that the deer had not killed Rama.

      So, all her worry for Rama's life in front of Lakshmana was acting to persuade Lakshmana to go after Rama and save him. But even after Seetha politely requested Lakshmana to go after Rama, he did not go as he believed that Rama was more than a match for Mareecha (Aranya Kanda Section 45 Verses 4b-5a, 10b-20a). Seeing that, Seetha got very angry and with bloodshot eyes, accused Lakshmana of not caring for Rama's life and wanting him to die (on Bharatha's orders). She also accused him of lusting after her (Aranya Kanda Secton 45 Verses 20b-27a). Lakshmana was unable to bear this insult towards him, and decided to leave Seetha in the hut and rush away to the forest, in anger. But Seetha soon realizes what she said in anger and repents. She then fools Lakshmana into believing that she did not mean what she said and that it all slipped out in anger (Aranya Kanda Section 45 Verses 35-38). Lakshmana gets fooled by Seetha's (crocodile) tears and reduces his anger towards Seetha and then goes after Rama...

      [In my opinion, the reason why Seetha tried to pacify Lakshmana's anger was because she thought that Rama might get angry upon hearing what she said to Lakshmana. Had Rama heard everything in the same intensity spoken by Seetha, his suspicion of mutual attraction between Seetha and Lakshmana may have been confirmed (i.e. to accuse Lakshmana of lusting after her, she must have had some "lust related feelings" for Lakshmana or she must have noticed some lust-related feelings in Lakshmana towards her. A sister in law accusing her brother in law of lusting after her is not in anyway normal behavior)... Since Seetha pacified Lakshmana, he reported Seetha's speech in much lower intensity to Rama, preventing Rama from getting angry (Aranya Kanda Section 59). So Seetha's plan was successful.

      One major reason for my belief in what I mentioned above is that in Aranya Kanda Section 46 Verses 9b-10a, prior to Ravana's arrival, Seetha is thinking about Rama. This is despite the fact that she knew her husband was not dead. This behavior can be explained if she was worried of Rama's anger when he hears the words she spoke to Lakshmana...]

      To be continued...

    5. Continued From Part 2...

      So now, lets continue... Lakshmana goes after Rama, and in the meanwhile, Seetha is all alone, by the hut. In the meanwhile, Ravana approaches Seetha and then praises her beauty. From his description, we get hints of Seetha's behavior when Ravana approached her. Ravana says (Aranya Kanda Section 46 Verses 18-22a):

      "Your teeth are evenly, smooth and their tips are like jasmine buds, and your whitish broad eyes are spotless, reddish at ends, and pupils are black. [3-46-18]. "Your hips are beamy, thighs burly akin to elephant's trunks, and these two breasts of yours that are ornamented with best jewellery are rotund, rubbing and bumping each other, and they are swinging up and up, their nipples are brawny and jutting out, and they are smoothish like palm-fruits, thus they are covetable for they are beautiful. [3-46-19, 20]. "Oh, allurer, your smile is alluring, teeth are alluring, and your eyes allure, oh, beauty, your waist is palmful, your hair velvety, your breasts are jostling, and you rob my soul as a spate robs riverbank. [3-46-21, 22a].

      So, from Ravana's description, we get to know that Seetha is exposing her thighs, highlighting her waist/hips to Ravana, and flaunting her breasts such that they are moving up and up. Furthermore, Ravana describes Seetha having a nipple errection (i.e. their nipples are brawny and jutting out), which is common when one is thinking of sex, or is sexually aroused. In addition, she also gives Ravana a big smile that exposed her teeth... Seeing all this, Ravana is sexually attracted to Seetha. He then goes on to ask Seetha whom she is (Aranya Kanda Section 46 Verses 31-32b). At that moment, Seetha does not answer his question, but invites Ravana in her hut despite realizing that he was exhibiting trickery (Aranya Kanda Section 46 Verses 32b-35). In other words, she realized that Ravana was a pseudo brahmin (an imposter) but still invited him into her hut.

      To be continued...

    6. Continued from Part 3...

      Then, Ravana accepts the respect given to him and stares at Seetha. Seeing her beauty, he then decides to woo Seetha and then take her to Lanka by all means (initially the plan was to not take her to Lanka forcibly)(Aranya Kanda Section 46 Verse 37). In the meanwhile, Seetha looks to see if Rama and Lakshmana have come or not (Aranya Kanda Section 46 Verse 38). It seems like she was getting paranoid at that moment and hence quickly revealed her identity to Ravana Aranya Kanda Section 47 Verses 3-22a). This allowed her to then ask Ravana whom he was. Thus asked, Ravana revealed his identity to Seetha and very politely proposed to her in marriage (Aranya Kanda Section 47 Verses 26-31):

      "Oh, Seetha, of whom all the worlds composed of gods, demons and humans are highly startled, I am that sovereign of hosts of demons, known as Ravana. [3-47-26]. "On seeing you, oh, impeccable one, glittering with golden complexion and attired in ochry-silks, I derive no pleasure in my wives. [3-47-27]. "You become my prime queen above all the choicest women with superior status, whom I have appropriated from here and there. [3-47-28]. "Nestled on a mountaintop my great city known as Lanka is there in the midst of an ocean and all over encompassed by an ocean. [3-47-29]. "Oh, Seetha, there you can saunter in pleasure-gardens along with me, and oh, lady with resentment, you will not think back to this forest-living, at all events. [3-47-30]. "Oh, Seetha, if you become my wife five thousand handmaidens adorned with ornaments of every description will be in your attendance." Thus Ravana said to Seetha. [3-47-31].

      You can see above how politely Ravana proposes to Seetha in marriage. He does not even threaten to abduct Seetha. But then Seetha lashes out at Ravana in the most disgusting manner. She essentially tells Ravana that how dare he even have the audacity to propose in marriage to her (Aranya Kanda Section 47 Verse 37). She goes on to say that he is a pathetic warrior and that if he even tries to abduct her, he will be killed by Rama in a fight (Aranya Kanda Section 47 Verse 41). An interesting thing to note here is that Ravana does not tell Seetha that he plans on abducting her. Then why did Seetha mention abduction in verse 41? She clearly had abduction in her mind and by mentioning abduction along with her volley of insults, was trying to provoke Ravana and indirectly give him the idea that he should kidnap her.

      However, Ravana maintains his composure, and praises his bravery, and then proposed in marriage to Seetha very politely once again (Aranya Kanda Section 48 Verses 2-19). However, this time, Seetha increases the intensity of her insults to Ravana. She is filled with bloodshot eyes and again attacks his ego. She says that Ravana can even live after abducting and raping Sachi, the wife of Indra. But if he tries to do the same to her, he will be killed by Rama and will not even get moksha (Aranya Kanda Section 48 Verses 23-24). Note again that Seetha mentions rape/kidnap even though Ravana never threatened to rape or kidnap Seetha. Again, she is provoking him by attacking his giant ego/pride and giving him the idea (indirectly) of kidnapping and raping her.

      To be continued...

    7. Continued From Part 4...

      Ravana is unable to bear this insult and this time, flexes his body to appear more attractive/handsome (Aranya Kanda Section 49 Verse 1,6). He then, filled with anger towards Seetha, praises his bravery and again proposes to Seetha (Aranya Kanda Section 49 Verse 3-5, 11-15a). However, he sees no response from Seetha.

      Filled with lust and with a desire to break Seetha's pride (she boasted how Rama is a greater warrior than Ravana), he grabs Seetha by her neck and thighs (Aranya Kanda Section 49 Verse 17). She shows absolutely no resistance to Ravana's touch (i.e. the act of Ravana kidnapping her was consensual), but instead just calls out to Rama so that her husband gets notified that she is kidnapped, so that he can come and "save her" after she enjoys life in Lanka for a long span of time (Aranya Kanda Section 49 Verse 21). Then, Ravana placed Seetha on his lap and ascended his air chariot (Aranya Kanda Section 49 Verse 20). Upon ascending his air chariot, he began to have sexual intercourse with Seetha (Aranya Kanda Section 49 Verse 22), causing Seetha to be filled with sexual excitement (Aranya Kanda Section 49 Verse 23). Then, Seetha quickly controls her excitement, and calls out to Lakshmana, Rama, and all of nature including its animals and rivers to let Rama know she is being kidnapped.

      Sounds like a drama queen to me!

      She also lashes out at Ravana again (probably to make him feel that he is "raping" her and taking her to Lanka against her wish)(Aranya Kanda Section 49 Verse 27).

      Then, while continuing the travel while having sexual intercourse with Ravana, she sees Jatayu. Below I am posting her reaction upon seeing Jatayu (Aranya Kanda Section 49 Verses 37-40):

      She that well-waisted lady who has gone into the captivity of Ravana craned and stared at the eagle, and worsted by fear she shrieked squeakily with a stuttering voice that is walloped with anguish. [3-49-37]. "Oh, fatherly Jatayu, see me, like an orphanized one I am pitiably abducted by this lord of demons with sinister deeds. [3-49-38]. "It is impossible for you to forestall this merciless night-walker, for he is formidable, shining forth with cunning conquests, also thus this wicked minded one is with weaponry. [3-49-39]. "Oh, Jatayu, everything about my abduction shall be narrated to Rama, or to Lakshmana, as it has happened in its entirety." Thus Seetha supplicated Jatayu. [3-49-40]

      As you can see, she was filled with anguish and stuttered when she saw Jatayu. Such stuttering was not present when she appealed to nature to let Rama know she was being kidnapped. This implies that stuttering was a result of Jatayu seeing her. Her reaction is a typical reaction upon getting caught "red handed in a crime". Seetha did not expect to see Jatayu, and when she did, she was shocked, and started to stutter. She thought that Jatayu might think the sex was consensual, so she pretended to him that she was a victim being raped by Ravana. The later behavior of Jatayu suggests that Jatayu bought into her words and believed she was being raped.

      She also "ordered" Jatayu to not attack Ravana, but instead to just tell Rama of her kidnap. It was clear that she didnt want to be "saved" at that moment.

      So that ends my narrative on the kidnap of Seetha. I think it should be quite evident that Seetha wanted to go with Ravana to Lanka. That is why she flaunted her body to Ravana, as I mentioned in this blog post.

    8. Please provide me the link of website of Valmiki's Ramayan!

    9. Here is the link to the website of Valmiki's Ramayana:


      What is shown in the serials is usually from Tulsidas Ramayana as it portrays Rama as a god, which is what Indian audience likes to see. If the Indian audience sees what I just wrote above, they would call for the serial to be banned as they would be uncomfortable with the content...

      So, as I mentioned above, Seetha provokes Ravana to kidnap and rape her. She wanted Ravana to take her to Lanka as her life in the forests was miserable. On top of that, Rama did not value her as a person with intelligence. He saw her as a less intelligent being and looked upon her as a sexual object. Furthermore, she had been married for 25 yrs and had sex with Rama all those years. Yet she had no child from Rama. Research suggests that women with children tend to be more sexually satisfied than women without children. So, Seetha was likely not sexually satisfied from her husband, and she wanted to go with Ravana to Lanka to mate with the handsome Ravana and enjoy the luxuries in Lanka.

      After Seetha provoked Ravana to kidnap her, Ravana went to lift Seetha up. But she provided no resistance and hence he took her away easily. Since she did not provide any physical resistance, we can't really say that Ravana forced her to go to Lanka.

      And yes, Ravana was superior to others in terms of might, spirituality, and knowledge of scriptures. The major reason for his loss was the betrayal of Vibhishana. Vibhishana saw how Ravana was a puppet in the hands of Seetha, and urged him to leave Seetha as she may prove dangerous to Lanka. But Ravana did not listen to him. So Vibhishana got angry and left Lanka. He also thought that he might help Rama and then gain control over Lanka, so thats why he betrayed his elder brother...

    10. Milin patel what rubbish are you talking about?
      And what rubbish you are talking about intercourse, Ravana was given a curse by the man who's wife was raped by ravana that if ravana would again or in future rape any female he will die and he cursed that he cannot keep any kidnapped female in his palace. So that's why ravana never forced himself on sitaji. And sita was a goddess she cannot do any rubbish things like you told in you text. You stupid idiot,raskle,brainless how can you talk about sitaji like that.Go and get knowledge about bhagwat gita,puranas and then come and speak.😠😠😠😡😡😡😡😠😠👎👎👎👎👎👎

    11. Crazy blog,

      Please don't write in this fashion on this blog. If you don't like the contents and arguments presented by Milin Patel on this blog, then you are welcome to take your rear end and the hole within it elsewhere, you don't have to participate.

      Milin has been kind enough to create this blog, even though he is very busy in his life. He has presented his views in a logical, rational, and polite manner, along with abundant proofs from the scriptures, all with correct translation of the Sanskrit.

      If you want to put divine personalities on a pedestal, feel free, but don't abuse others who are taking a realistic view of what is written in Valmiki Ramayan and other scriptures.

      Have a wonderful day.

    12. Crazy blog,

      I have addressed Ravana's curse in previous blog posts:



      About Sita's kidnap, if you are open minded enough, and willing to read through my perspective, with verses, go through this post:


      As Rohit Shah said, if you are unwilling to hear my perspective, you can hit the cross button on the top right of your screen. But again, if you are open minded enough to consider my perspective, you are welcome to comment here, and even criticize my opinions. I don't believe in moderation of comments/ideas, even if they are somewhat abusive, so none of your comments will be deleted/removed on my blog, by me.

    13. Thanks Rohit. I usually don't get angry when I see such comments by bhaktas. It's more of a feeling of pity for them. His/her beliefs and preconceived notions were no doubt hurt by my opinions, and hence the emotional outburst. But I would be willing to discuss the objections to my opinion though, if he/she is willing.

      I feel glad that I made this blog, since I have come across more and more liberal and open-minded individuals (on this blog) with opinions on Hinduism, that would be moderated/deleted on other platforms. It did take alot of time for some of my articles (for example, the Hanumana Burning Lanka series took me an entire summer, and the one on Sita's kidnap, which I had been interested in doing for about 1.5 years before I actually made the article, took about 30 hours [2.5 days], which is quite long considering how much time I usually take for my other posts), but I think it was worth it, seeing the readership of my blog, which is increasing every month. I have roughly about 50,000 views on this blog so far.

  2. What happened to lanka after death of Vibishana?

    1. Valmiki Ramayana ends with Rama/Lakshmana/Seetha returning to Ayodhya after making Vibhishana ruler of Lanka. From that time onwards, Vibhishana was ruling Lanka as a vassal of Rama. The kingdom gradually deteriorated in prosperity and strength (possibly due to over taxation by Rama?) and by the time Sahadeva went to conquer it for Digvijaya, it was too weak to provide adequate resistance, so Vibhishana agreed to pay tribute to King Yuddhistira:

      And, O king of kings, that slayer of all foes, the virtuous and intelligent son of Madri having arrived at the sea-shore, then despatched with great assurance messengers unto the illustrious Vibhishana, the grandson of Pulastya. And the monarch willingly accepted the sway of the son of Pandu, for that intelligent and exalted king regarded it all as the act of Time. And he sent unto the son of Pandu diverse kinds of jewels and gems, and sandal and also wood, and many celestial ornaments, and much costly apparel, and many valuable pearls. And the intelligent Sahadeva, accepting them all, returned to his own kingdom.


      Soon after that, Vibhishana should have died (as he was already quite old) and Lanka may have been absorbed into another kingdom into India because in Udyoga Parva, when the armies supporting the Kauravas and Pandavas were mentioned, there was no mention of Vibhishana nor of Lanka...

      So, after the kingdom went into the hands of Vibhishana, all the glory of Ravana diminished and eventually got extinguished...

  3. Ok Thanks! Quite knowledgable. Can we say that descendents of Ravan could be stll alive?

    1. No, all of Ravana's sons died in the war. So his descendents are not alive. But Vibhishana's and Kubera's descendents are probably still alive...


    2. Sita's birth has been depicted differently in different versions of Ramayana.

      In Valmiki's Ramayana, Sita is said to have been discovered in a furrow in a ploughed field, and for that reason is regarded as a daughter of Bhoomi Devi (the goddess earth), she was then adopted and brought up by Janaka and his wife Sunayana.

      Some versions of Ramayana mentions Sita as daughter Ravana.
      Vedavati(An Avtar of Goddess Lakshmi), a pious brahmin woman wanted to marry Vishnu. She was living in an ashram on a riverbank. Once while Vedavati was meditating on the riverbank, Ravana happened to see her. He was enamored by her beauty and tried to violate her. To escape from Ravana she jumped into a fire pit created for Yajna. Before dying she cursed Ravana that in her next birth she will be responsible for his death.

      In her next birth, Vedavati was born as Ravana and Mandodhari’s daughter. Astrologers predicted that the baby will be responsible for her father’s death. To save his life, Ravana threw the little girl child into the sea. The child fell on the lap of sea-goddess Varuni. Goddess Varuni took the girl child to the shores and gave her to Bhoomi Devi. Goddess Bhoomi then gave her to King Janaka while ploughing a field.

      According to Uttara Purana, Ravana had bad intentions for Manivati the princess of Alkapuri. Manivati pledged to take revenge on Ravana. Later she was reborn as the daughter of Ravana and Mandodari. But the astrologers predicted that the child would destroy his lineage. So, Ravana ordered his servant to kill the child. However the servant did not kill the girl and instead buried her in Mithila where she was found by Janaka.

      Jaina Ramayana portraits Ravana’s love towards Sita the other way round.

      According to Jaina Ramayana, Sita was born as daughter of Ravana. However the astrologers predicted that the first child of Ravana would be responsible for his death. Therefore Ravana ordered his servants to take the child to some distant lands and bury her there. Thus, she was found and adopted by Janaka.
      It appears in Jaina Ramayana that Ravana was in love with Sita but only as a father loves his daughter. Though Ravana ordered his servants to bury her in a distant land, he kept a check on Sita's whereabouts. He was overjoyed to find that Sita was adopted by a Janaka. He also attended Sita's swayamvara ceremony to see her get married. He was happy to see that Sita got married to Raghuvamshi Rama. All was well until Ram was sent to exile for 14 years.
      He didn’t want his daughter to suffer in forest and wanted to put an end to the misery. So he abducted her and brought her to Lanka.

    3. I am aware that her birth is depicted differently in the versions. I dont think Ravana was her father as Ravana was described as being black skinned and Seetha as being golden skinned. If she was his daughter, her skin color would have been more darker, right? But she was probably abandoned by her real parents and adopted by Janaka...

      Also, the stories of Ravana raping women and then being cursed are later additions to hide the fact that Ravana had sex with Seetha. I will create a blog post on that soon...

  4. One of the programs telecasted by an Indian channel based on historical proofs available with Sri Lankan Government prove that Raavana was a part of their society and he ruled a kingdom which was more than what actual Sri Lanka is today.

    This would be an eye opening finding for all those who believe that ‘Ramayana’ is a myth.

    They believe that Raavana’s Coffin Available,Either Valmiki or Tulsi Das haven’t mentioned about the last rites performed to Raavana after his death in the hands of Rama. Now, Sri Lanka Government has come with a substantial proof that coffin consisting of the dead body of Raavana was hidden in a small cave named as ‘Raavana Cave’ and some of the tribals in Nuwara Eliya (Noroliya) hills are conserving it. Every time Sri Lankan Government sent special armed forces to this inaccessible hill in dense forest, there was a natural disaster. Still, Lanka Government are on its perfect plan to bring the coffin which has been seen by few of the army people.

    Five ancient airports found - Nearly 9 hours drive from Colombo into a dense forest and a day of journey from there on will land the team of archaelogists on a hill of altitude 8000 feet where in a table top of 18 Kms is found with evidences of 5 Airports. Raavana had an air fleet of atleast 5 aeroplanes which they called as ‘Pushpaka Vimana.’ An ancient rock cut sculpture of ‘Big Bird (Eagle) flying with its wings opened’ found on this hill serves as proof that Raavana used aeroplanes.

    When Raavana had kidnapped Sita and was returning to Lanka by his plane, he had given some tablets to her so that she doesn’t experience physical strain, which were thrown by her in fit of rage. These tablets are known as ‘Sita goli’ and are being tested in Japan to have medicinal values.

    A painting of Vibheeshana’s photo which survived centuries will still be available in Sri Lankan parliament.

    1. Oh! Thats quite interesting! According to Valmiki Ramayana, Vibhishana and Rama did Ravana's last rites the vedic way (which Ravana fought against all his life)... But what you said is also a possibility.

  5. I have'nt read Valmiki's ramayan but I've seen one of the news channel IBN 7 on you tube which shows that last rites had not mentioned in Valmiki's ramayan. Vibhushan left the battlefield in hurry leaving the dead body of his brither ravan, so as to get crowened as a king by ram

    There is an official declaration by sri lankan govt. about ravana's cave. They believed that trusted demons of Nagvansh take the dead body of ravan in cave and mummified him. This tradition which seems quite similar to that of Greek. You might have heard about Tutankhamen who died during his teen age. His mummy was found in the valley of kings and recently scientists through their efforts was able to get to know how he looked when he died.

    The place where ravan's dead body is believed to be present, contains PAANDULIPIA which is not readable. Also, that cave does'nt seems natural. It is believed that it was believed specially for him, which was made up of material like concrete of that time, sine mixture of chuna etc.

    There were many facts which are still untouched. Please mention about the last rites of valmiki's ramayan!

    1. According to Valmiki Ramayana, Ravana's last rites were done on Vibhishana's order. You can read the respective section in the link below:


      But we can always have a debate on whether this is reliable or not...

    2. Do you know that place where Ravan was believed to be born?

    3. I am not too sure where Ravana was born. But I would assume it would be Lanka.

  6. One most important thing that I want to mention is that the rock which is believed that inside this may contain ravan's dead body, is in perfect square shape as if someone have moulded this rock. All the rock except this rick is in irregular shape.

    This rock measured around 18 feet long and 5 feet in breadth.

    I had watched that show on IBN 7 on you tube They have shown that rock

  7. Well! Some peaple believe that Ramayan is something around 6000 years ago. How is this possible?

    1. I think dating has put the Mahabharatha at around 3000 BCE. Textual evidence within Mahabharatha suggests that Ramayana happened a maximum of 100 years before Mahabharatha. So going by that Ramayana could have happened around 5000 years ago... But some scholars instead believe that Ramayana took place around 3200-3500 yrs ago (1200 BCE-1500 BCE).

    2. The dating of Mahabharta as 3,000BCE is only given by Hindu fanatics, The oldest archaelogical evidence of the scripture doesn't go beyond a few centuries AD,And though Ramayana is older than Mahabharta it happened much later than the composition of Rig Veda (1000BC to 200BC).Therefore more plausible dating for Ramayana will be between 100BC to 1000BC.

    3. Hi Shrey,

      I agree that 3000 BCE as the date for Mbh is way too early. In my opinion, Ramayana took place around 1000 BCE, and Mbh took place around 900 BCE. I date Mbh and Ramayana within a century of one another because Mahabharata mentions that Sahadeva encountered Vibhishana (descendent of Paulastya) in his Southern Digvijaya mission.

      BTW, which archaeological evidence are you referring to? The last image in this post dates to the Sunga era, and depicts Sita's kidnap. Panini (5-6th century BCE) mentions Vasudeva and Arjuna worship in his Ashtadhyayi, so the basic Mahabharata katha must have been in existence in some form (if not a coherent epic, then in the form of bardic tales/legends) at least a few centuries before the 6th century. It would take time after the first bardic tales formed, for cult-worship of Arjuna and Krishna to materialize...

  8. Ramayana goes back in Treta yug and Mahabharata happened something at the end of dwapar or start of Kaliyug period. Ramayana and Mahabharat are epics of different period. How can the difference between the two could be just 100 years?

    Moreover, Have you heard about pandava's kitchen?

    1. In Mahabharatha and Ramayana, Satayuga is when there is a good, dharmic ruler ruling the kingdom, causing the prosperity to increase. When an admaric and evil ruler ruling the kingdom, and the prosperity of the kingdom decreases, we would have kali yuga. The concept of fixed dates for all 4 yugas is a puranic concept. I find the mahabharatha/ramayana concept on yugas more believable.

      When Sahadeva of Mahabharatha proceeds southwards for his digvijaya, he encounters Mainda, Dwivida, and Vibhishana, all of whom took part in the war against Ravana. This means that there could not have been a great delay between the two epics.

      No, I have not heard about the pandavas kitchen.

    2. That may be due to the reason as peaple of that time used to live upto many thousands of years as Ravan lived somewhat around 10,000 years.

      I forget to tell you about pandav's kitchen which they used during 18 days of mahabharat war. That place is in sangrur,punjab. Click on this link https://youtu.be/wH5d2_oDEI0

    3. It is not logically possible for people to live that long. Jatayu said he lived for 60 000 yrs. Should we take that literally? In my opinion, no. It just means he lived for a long time. And Ravana did not live for that long as no signs of agedness were described on him by Valmiki. Instead, he was described as extremely handsome even when on the battlefield, a couple of days before his death. He was clearly a bit younger than a middle aged person when he died.

      I have also heard of Pandava's kitchen. But the evidence/argument does not seem too convincing.

  9. Do you know the exact birthdate when shree Ram and ravan and was born? Which place Ravan was born? What could be the total age of Ravan and ram when they died? Sonce gow many years they were believed to lived?

    1. I don't know the exact birthdate of Rama and Ravana. Ravana was born in Lanka. Ravana and Rama were likely of the same generation. However, since Rama was impotent, he did not have a child with Seetha for 25 years after marriage. Had he not been impotent, he would have had a child about the age of Indrajita.

      So, Ravana probably lived till the age of 45, and Rama probably lived till 55 years, in my opinion.

    2. How could this be possibe? Total age of human beings according to the yugas is as follows

      Life of human being in Satyug period> Treta Yuga> Dwapar yug> Kaliyug

      Ram was believed to lived for around thousands of years approx. 1100yrs.

      avana was more than 10,000 years old during the war.

      Acoording to one of the verses of Valmiki Ranayana, Uthara Kanda :-

      दशवर्षसहस्रं तु निराहारो दशाननः ।
      पूर्णे वर्षसहस्रे तु शिरश्चाग्नौ जुहाव सः ।

      The ten-headed Ravana did tapasya for 10,000 years . At the end of each thousand years he offered one head to Agni. and since he had 10 heads, it took 10000 years when he was to cut his last head but Bramha then appeared for him.

    3. The ages given for the yugas and the ages of people in each yuga are given in puranas, not Mahabharatha/Ramayana. I don't find the puranic explanation convincing...

      The last section of Yuddha Kanda says Rama lived for 10 000 yrs. Why not 10 001 or 9999 yrs? Why exactly 10 000 yrs?

      This is poetry right? Are exaggerations not common in poetry? The take home message is that Rama lived for a long time. That section also makes more exaggerations. For example, it says that all 4 varnas lived happily ever after. Are we to believe that there were no disputes between the varnas at all? Again, this is just exaggerations...

      You can read that section here:


      Uttara Kanda is a later addition to the epic. Also, Ravana was not literally 10 headed. The 10 head are symbolic and represent his intelligence.

    4. Did you read the Buddhist Ramayana? Non fanatic Scholars claim that later version of Ramayana were fabricated by Brahmiñs to hide many facts

    5. Shrey,

      You are referring to the Dasaratha Jataka? I have read it, and made a post on it:


      I have also heard that Dasaratha Jataka is a little bit older than the Valmiki Ramayana, but I don't believe that it depicts the Ramakatha in a more authentic manner. Panini mentions Kishkindha, and the only time Kishkindha is mentioned in the Hindu canon in with regards to Rama's invasion of Lanka. So Panini, who is dated to be older that the Dasaratha Jataka, knows of Rama's invasion of Lanka.

      The Dasaratha Jataka, however, represents the Ramakatha as being free of any invasion of Lanka or kidnap of Sita. It would seem that the Dasaratha Jataka used elements of the Ramakatha, and remoulded the rest of the Ramakatha to suit the ahimsa ideals of Buddhism. For example, I find the Dasaratha Jataka's claim that Rama, Sita, and Lakshmana were siblings to be quite likely. It would explain many loopholes in the Valmiki Ramayana text. Other ancient versions, such as the Kakawin (Indonesian) Ramayana, also depict them as siblings.

  10. No, Bro that's what I want to test you whether you know about it or not. Actually very few peaple knows about Ravana's bithplace

    Bisrakh is a village of Greater Noida, in the Indian state of Uttar Pradesh, believed to be the birthplace of the mythological king Ravana of the epic Ramayana, who is called the "Maha Brahman." Ravana in later years reigned as the king of Sri Lanka. As the village people strongly identify Bisrakh with the tragic hero of Ramayana, they do not hold the annual Dassehara or Diwali festivals but mourn Ravana's death. However, in all other parts of the country the celebration of Dussehara culminates with burning of effigy of Ravana marking his killing by Rama. The nine days of Navratra ending in Dassehara are observed by the people of the village as a period of mourning when they offer prayers for peace to the soul of Ravana and perform Yagna.

    According to a local legend, the name of the village is a derivation of Vishravas, father of Ravana, who was a famous sage of the ancient times who lived and worshipped Lord Shiva in this village. Ravana who was born in this village had spent his early childhood here. Vishravas had found a linga in the forest area and had established the Bisrakh Dhaam (abode of God) with the linga deified therein where he offered worship.
    According to mythology Vishravas, a Brahmin, had wedded Kaikesi, a rakshasa princess; Ravana thus had a mix of Brahmin and rakshasa (demon) blood. Vishravas's elder son by his first wife was Kubera, now worshipped as a god of wealth, who ruled Lanka until Ravana became the king himself.
    According to local belief celebrations of Ramalila in Bisrakh would invite the wrath of Ravana. Instead, fire sacrifices or Yajnas are held during Navratra festival to the Shiva linga praying homage to Ravana.

    1. That is interesting! But do we have any textual evidence from any of the many versions of Ramayana, that support this?

    2. Did you know sanskrit? If yes, then how much time it takes to completely learn and from where?

    3. Wikipedia appeoves it. Lol!! Peaple of that are approves as well. No, I can't tell you whether it is there on scriptures or not. As I don't know sanskrit

    4. कुबेर व रावण दोनों ऋषि विश्रवा की संतान थे और दोनों सौतेले भाई थे। ऋषि विश्रवा ने सोने की लंका का राज्‍य कुबेर को दिया था लेकिन किसी कारणवश अपने पिता के कहने पर वे लंका का त्याग कर हिमाचल चले गए।

      कुबेर के चले जाने के बाद इससे दशानन बहुत प्रसन्न हुआ। वह लंका का राजा बन गया और लंका का राज्‍य प्राप्‍त करते ही धीरे-धीरे वह इतना अहंकारी होगया कि उसने साधुजनों पर अनेक प्रकार के अत्याचार करने शुरू कर दिए।

      जब दशानन के इन अत्‍याचारों की ख़बर कुबेर को लगी तो उन्होंने अपने भाई को समझाने के लिए एक दूत भेजा, जिसने कुबेर के कहे अनुसार दशानन को सत्य पथ पर चलने की सलाह दी। कुबेर की सलाह सुन दशानन को इतना क्रोध आया कि उसने उस दूत को बंदी बना लिया व क्रोध के मारे तुरन्‍त अपनी तलवार से उसकी हत्‍या कर दी।

      कुबरे की सलाह से दशानन इतना क्रोधित हुआ कि दूत की हत्‍या के साथ ही अपनी सेना लेकर कुबेर की नगरी अलकापुरी को जीतने निकल पड़ा और कुबेर की नगरी को तहस-नहस करने के बाद अपने भाई कुबेर पर गदा का प्रहार कर उसे भी घायल कर दिया लेकिन कुबेर के सेनापतियों ने किसी तरह से कुबेर को नंदनवन पहुँचा दिया जहाँ वैद्यों ने उसका इलाज कर उसे ठीक किया।

      चूंकि दशानन ने कुबेर की नगरी व उसके पुष्‍पक विमान पर भी अपना अधिकार कर लिया था, सो एक दिन पुष्‍पक विमान में सवार होकर शारवन की तरफ चल पड़ा। लेकिन एक पर्वत के पास से गुजरते हुए उसके पुष्पक विमान की गति स्वयं ही धीमी हो गई।

      चूंकि पुष्‍पक विमान की ये विशेषता थी कि वह चालक की इच्‍छानुसार चलता था तथा उसकी गति मन की गति से भी तेज थी, इसलिए जब पुष्‍पक विमान की गति मंद हो गर्इ तो दशानन को बडा आश्‍चर्य हुआ। तभी उसकी दृष्टि सामने खडे विशाल और काले शरीर वाले नंदीश्वर पर पडी। नंदीश्वर ने दशानन को चेताया कि-

      यहाँ भगवान शंकर क्रीड़ा में मग्न हैं इसलिए तुम लौट जाओ.
      लेकिन दशानन कुबेर पर विजय पाकर इतना दंभी होगया था कि वह किसी कि सुनने तक को तैयार नहीं था। उसे उसने कहा कि-

      कौन है ये शंकर और किस अधिकार से वह यहाँ क्रीड़ा करता है? मैं उस पर्वत का नामो-निशान ही मिटा दूँगा, जिसने मेरे विमान की गति अवरूद्ध की है।
      इतना कहते हुए उसने पर्वत की नींव पर हाथ लगाकर उसे उठाना चाहा। अचानक इस विघ्न से शंकर भगवान विचलित हुए और वहीं बैठे-बैठे अपने पाँव के अंगूठे से उस पर्वत को दबा दिया ताकि वह स्थिर हो जाए। लेकिन भगवान शंकर के ऐसा करने से दशानन की बाँहें उस पर्वत के नीचे दब गई। फलस्‍वरूप क्रोध और जबरदस्‍त पीडा के कारण दशानन ने भीषण चीत्‍कार कर उठा, जिससे ऐसा लगने लगा कि मानो प्रलय हो जाएगा। तब दशानन के मंत्रियों ने उसे शिव स्तुति करने की सलाह दी ताकि उसका हाथ उस पर्वत से मुक्‍त हो सके।

      दशानन ने बिना देरी किए हुए सामवेद में उल्लेखित शिव के सभी स्तोत्रों का गान करना शुरू कर दिया, जिससे प्रसन्न होकर भगवान शिव ने दशानन को क्षमा करते हुए उसकी बाँहों को मुक्त किया।

      दशानन द्वारा भगवान शिव की स्‍तुति के लिए किए जो स्‍त्रोत गाया गया था, वह दशानन ने भयंकर दर्द व क्रोध के कारण भीषण चीत्‍कार से गाया था और इसी भीषण चीत्‍कार को संस्‍कृत भाषा में राव: सुशरूण: कहा जाता है। इसलिए जब भगवान शिव, रावण की स्‍तुति से प्रसन्‍न हुए और उसके हाथों को पर्वत के नीचे से मुक्‍त किया, तो उसी प्रसन्‍नता में उन्‍होंने दशानन का नाम रावण यानी ‘भीषण चीत्कार करने पर विवश शत्रु’ रखा क्‍योंकि भगवान शिव ने रावण को भीषण चीत्‍कार करने पर विवश कर दिया था और तभी से दशानन काे रावण कहा जाने लगा।

      शिव की स्तुति के लिए रचा गया वह सामवेद का वह स्त्रोत, जिसे रावण ने गाया था, को आज भी रावण-स्त्रोत व शिव तांडव स्‍त्रोत के नाम से जाना जाता है, जो

    5. I have not been formally trained in sanskrit, so I can't tell you how long it would take to learn the language. And wikipedia can be edited by anyone, and propagates many lies regarding our epics. So I won't take what wikipedia as the final word. However, what you wrote earlier is interesting. If I find a mention of it in any version of Ramayana, I will let you know.

    6. In ramayan it is shown that Ravana caught Shani, Rahu-ketu etc. on different corners of shri lanka for the pupoe of shatipeeth which gives him power. But, I thought they were planets or they shown just for the purpose of understanding?

    7. They are planets. Ravana did not literally capture them.

  11. ur comment above abt sita kidnap and marichaa is filled with blasphemy . ur argument is based on ganguly other pseudo intellcetuals if any above what u say is true that sita lusted for ravana then she would not be celebrated and remembered today . ur by far worst than any pedophile cuz ur corrupting youth with false interpretation of great epic.

    1. Valotaa,

      If you consider what I said as blasphemous, then that is your problem. Nothing I said is blasphemous and I never insulted any character in the epic without providing textual evidence. If I said that Seetha lusted after Ravana, I provided textual evidence to back my claims...

      Your second sentence gave me a good laugh. So sanskrit scholars are pseudo intellectuals? Then whom would you call "intellectuals"? KM Ganguly is a sanskrit scholar. He translated Mahabharatha, NOT Ramayana. Ramayana was translated by KMK Murthy and Desiraju Hanumanta Rao. Their translations are not perfect, but they are a good start. You can read them on valmikiramayana.net.

      Society changes over time. Hence what was common yesterday may not be common today. Today Seetha is known for her chastity by newer versions of Ramayana, like Ramacharitamanas. Many people today refer to Tulsidas' version, instead of the original version of Valmiki as it suits their interests of considering Rama a Vishnu avatara.

      But a careful read of the original Valmiki Ramayana shows that Seetha was a highly sexual woman. I have provided references for this in my above comment... Today, due to medival invasion influence, chastity is much valued. But when Valmiki Ramayana was written (4th century BCE), chastity was not practiced. In fact, in 305 BCE Megasthenes says that majority of Indian women prostitute their body post-marriage. This was in the prosperous Mauryan Empire...

      Now you are calling me a pedophile? What is the basis for such claims. Before making such statements, you should keep in mind that Seetha tells Ravana (prior to her kidnap) that she was 6 yrs old and Rama was 12 yrs old (16 yrs old according to other quotes) when he married Seetha. Is that not pedophilia? So think before making such statements...

    2. Sok sareth don't follow this bloody idiot he is just insulting the great epics and he will pay for that😠😠

  12. Hi Dear!
    I Really Like Your Post & I always follow to read for your comment!
    Thank for your sharing the good information, PLZ post more...

    gclub online casino

  13. That must be a lot of tears ha ha. They must have been giants.

  14. Very well said and spoken with illustration, evidence and prove. I felt similar to Eve in the Bible. Men weakness is women. Thank you.

  15. You should read Buddhist Ramayana as it is the oldest Ramayana, later versions of Ramayana were corrupted by Brahmins,Read it and please post about it in your blogs, love your works and liberal views based on Evidence rather than fanaticism. Ignore the haters!

    1. Shrey,

      Thanks. I did make a post on the Dasaratha Jataka: