Thursday, 22 February 2018

The Vanara Tribe of Valmiki Ramayana!

Back in July 2016, I had written an article titled “Were the Vanaras of Ramayana Humans or Chimps?”, where I had argued that the Vanaras of the Valmiki Ramayana were not chimps, but rather they were a tribe of human forest dwellers. In that article I had explained that the term Vanara is derived from the sanskrit words Vana (meaning forest) and Nara (meaning men). The reason why this tribe was depicted as monkeys in the Valmiki Ramayana was that they were described as roaming around naked, flaunting around their private parts very often, having unrestrained sexuality, and being prone to base-instincts like animals. My opinion on the Vanara tribe is still the same, however since I did not explain all the evidence I had at hand to back my claims, I have recently edited my article to include this evidence.

Those readers that are interested may access this updated article here.

Related image

Source: http://www.earthbeforeflood.com/vanaras.html (A.V.Koltypin, 2009)

Above is an artistic depiction of two Vanaras fighting. Note the emphasis on the Vanaras' sexuality in the above depiction. The Vanara on the right has his mouth interlocked with the one on the left, as if they are kissing, and is also holding the thigh of the Vanara on the left, giving a sexual tone to the interaction between the two Vanaras, in their fight with one another...

11 comments:

  1. Did Ramayana occurred in 12000 BCE.Was kumbhakarna a robot.How was surpanakha able to reach Lanka after disfigured if there was no bridge before.Was pushpak viman real.Why was ravana using a donkey chariot.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kedar, 12000 BCE seems to early. I would say around 1100-1500 BCE would be a more appropriate date.

      Kumbhakarna was not a robot. We have no evidence that the ancients were advanced enough to design robots. Pushpak Vimana is described as the harem of Ravana in Sundara Kanda. In Yuddha Kanda, we get to learn that the Pushpaka Vimana was also able to be mobilized. Perhaps the moving of the Pushpaka Vimana, just as was the case when it transported Seetha et al from Lanka to Ayodhya after the Ramayana was was over, symbolizes the mobilization of the harem of Ravana (since the Pushpaka Vimana is used to represent the harem of Ravana in Sundara Kanda). The mobilization of the harem of kings is not unknown in history. For example, Emperor Akbar was known to mobilize his harem and take them with him on some of the military expeditions he went on.

      As for your donkey chariot question, the chariot used by Ravana to kidnap Seetha was described being yoked by donkeys having the faces of Pisachas, and the chariot was able to travel as per kama (desire) of Ravana. Below is a research paper that addresses the symbolism of the donkeys. You might want to give it a read:

      http://jstor.org/stable/41688839

      In the paper, the author essentially argues that the chariot mentioned was actually a boat used to cross the 100 yojana ocean. It was described as being able to travel as per kama (desire) - of Ravana, because Ravana was telling the navigators where he wanted it to go. These navigators would have been the Pisaacha headed donkeys, who would guide the boat in accordance with Ravana's desires. Just as a donkey would guide a chariot, so would these navigators guide the boat. They were likened to donkeys (instead of horses) perhaps because of their ugly appearance (again, the fact that they were described as having heads like Pisachas confirms their ugly appearance), their lack of intelligence, and because they navigated the boat very slowly.

      Delete
    2. The date of 12000 BCE was proposed by Nilesh Oak considering the astronomical events described in Valmiki Ramayana.Is the current Sri Lanka the Lanka of Ramayana.The most confusing thing is how hanuman able to bring sanjeevani .

      Delete
    3. Kedar,

      I don't agree with Nilesh Oak's work because he solely relies on Astronomical data in coming to his conclusion. Astronomical finding must be analyzed in sync with Archaeological findings. As far as I am aware, we have no archaeological findings suggesting that human civilization existed in 12 000 BCE. The problem with relying solely on astronomical findings is that various researchers have used astronomical findings to come with various dates, ranging from 1000 BCE to 12 000 BCE. The reason for this is that Mahabharatha/Ramayana are very tampered texts. If the verses used as evidence for the astronomical analysis are the ones that are later additions to the epic(s), then it causes us to reach at incorrect dates for the Mahabharatha/Ramayana war.

      My reading of Valmiki Ramayana suggests that the Lanka of Ravana may have been the Nicobar and Andaman islands. You might want to read this article to see my rationale for such an opinion:

      https://www.facebook.com/milin.patel.96995/posts/895356353973265

      As for Hanumana bringing Sanjeevani, it may be an interpolation. He apparently goes to the Himalayas to get the mountain and reaches back while war is still going on (i.e. before the day of war concludes). That does not seem too logical, considering the distance between Lanka and the Himalayas...

      Delete
  2. But what was the point of this post? This was a useless blog post you made. It did not explain anything. All it did was link us to AN OLDER POST of yours.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah Jaideep, it didn't explain much. I just created it to link back to an older post, as I made some major changes to that older post...

      Delete
  3. Milin, someone is impersonating you on Rao's blog. http://empiresoflight.blogspot.com/2018/02/vadakayils-hero-vladimir-putin.html?showComment=1521541914036#c3340767028700379095

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Even I noticed the same and wanted to inform him, but you've done so before me.

      The moron impersonator is none other than Amith Mishra. He impersonated himself on the same blog last month.
      http://empiresoflight.blogspot.in/2018/01/donald-trump-is-correct-about-shithole.html

      Now he's hiding behind Milin Patel, but his piss poor English betrayed him/his impersonation.

      Delete
    2. wow i cant believe this !! i suspect ysv rao more this fellow amith mishra , they are trying to coverup ysv rao ,by putting blame on someone else

      Delete
    3. hakunamatata500, Th1rt3en, and gavrav, thank you for informing me about this. I just checked Ysv Rao's blog. It was a pretty poor effort for Amith Mishra or whomever else it may have been, to impersonate me, considering his poor grasp on the English language... LOL.

      Delete
    4. hahaha i agree but why would ysv minions want to inform you about this considering they always insulted you in the blog? this must a click bait by them since ysv will not hesitate to stoop to low level

      Delete