Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian
From: kbalasub@sparcle.oracle.com (Kris Balasubramanian)
Subject: Re: On Indian Civilization being the Oldes
Reply-To: kbalasub@sparcle.oracle.com
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 18:27:38 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by an unauthenticated user
              at Oracle Corporation.  The opinions expressed are those
              of the user and not necessarily those of Oracle.

In article 7D3@cs.psu.edu, narayana@psuvax1.cs.psu.edu (Kuram T Narayana) writes:
>In article <Bx6Fvn.Dzn@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca> selvakum@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca (C.R.Selvakumar - Electrical Engineering) writes:
>>
>>
>>In article <Bwu8BH.4u8@cs.psu.edu>, narayana@psuvax1.cs.psu.edu (Kuram T Narayana) writes:
>>> Selvakumar writes that Ravana could have made Sita impure if he chose
>>  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>> to do so?
>>> 
>>> My answer is no! The characterization of Sita in Ramayana is one
>>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>> of purity. When combined with Sita's love for Rama and elevated
>>> to divinity, the character of Sita assumes enormous and indestructible
>>> power that can smash any evil. Precisely this aspect forced Ravana
>>> to condition his maniacal desires for Sita. The abduction of Sita
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>> in Ramayana is not a consequence of the humiliation suffered by
>>> Surphanaka, another raving dravidian sex maniac. Sita swayamvarum
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>> is the basis for Ravana's lust for Sita.
>>
>>      
>>        When Ravana is assumed to have the power to abduct Sita
>>        why do you think he could NOT have dishonored her. It
>>        does not appear convincing ! In Valmiki Ramayana, I understand
>>        that Ravana lifts Sita by her hair and carries her on his
>>        thighs ( please correct me if i'm wrong, this is what i remember
>>        read a long time ago) much against her wish. In  Tamil 
>>        Kamba RamayaNam
>>        in accordance with tamil sentiments, Ravana scoops the 
>
>So it is within the Tamil sentiment to abduct for lustful puposes
>somebody's wife. You seem to be watching lot of Balacander movies.

Hey,  comeon, dont go tangential.  He did not say that. You only started the mud slinging on Ravana as "dravidian sex maniac". Selva gave a  meaningful explanation
to why Ravana could have done that. You are too emotional and are putting blinders to your thinking process.  Why dont you atleast for discussions sake keep a open mind 
and view it from Ravanas side. His sister was humiliated by the other side, for whatever reason (which I dont think is warrented), Ravan if not for his sisters sake,
being a king has to prove to his people that he is not going to take that lying down.
(It is as good as US's war on Sadam), so he probably (emotionally like you) did what
he thought as correct. Since Rama did not have any other material possesion at that
time (in vanavasa) it was logical for him to humiliate Sita for his sister. As per
your arguement Sita could have done so many things like burned him etc. but she
did not do it.  Ravana was magnanimous in not doing any harm to Sita. Let us see
what is in the story and not fantasise about what could have happened if Ravan did
some thing etc.
>
>>        earth where Sita Devi stands and does NOT touch Sita Devi (-: 
>>        [ many unbiased readers familiar with various Ramayanas say
>>         Tamil Kamba Ramayanam is best and by far the richest (-; ]
>>
>
>The fact is the evil sex maniac Ravana abducted Sita; whether he took her
>by her hair or by the mud under her feet is not material; he may
>have taken with the mud under her because Sita is so divinely pure
>and she would have burned the Dravidian Ravana then itself. Now it
>is left to the North Indians (Aryans in your view) to burn the Tamil Ravana.
>
>>        First you described *confidently* about Ravana's urges and
>>        now you talk of 'Surpanaka as a raving dravidian sex maniac' !
>>        You seem to be some expert in certain matters (-; (-;
>>        
>
>No! I don't claim expertise in measuring the testostarone levels 
>of Ravana. I go by assessing consequences. I leave it to some of 
>the Dravidian racists to accomplish that task.
>
>
Ofcourse you did. You only strated  "testostarone" and such. 
>>         
>> > 
>>> Selvakumar writes that many Tamils consider the burning of Ravana
>>> in Ramlila celebrations of the Northern parts of India as burning
>>> the Tamils. In Ramlila celebrations, the buring of Ravana is
>>> symbolic of the burning of the evil. That Ravana was evil is 
>>                                       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>> established  precisely through his actions. If some Tamilians choose
>>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>> to interpret the burning of Ravana as the burning of Tamils,
>>> then it is their problem. Evil must be burnt. If some Tamilians choose
>>                            ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>> to agrandize evil, then it is their the Tamilian's thinking process
>>> that needs to be blamed.
>>
>>          Let us try to compare Ravana and Rama based on their actions!
>>          Ravana loses a point by abducting Sita ( but he does not dishonor
>>          her). 
>
>The buck stops there. Period. It is the point, and only the one.

Why should it stop here? Because you said so? If you are not open to unbiased discussion then dont get involved in it. Just dont talk like Bush did. You are again
putting a blinder to your thinking. Because Rama is considered a God whatever he did was correct, and you do not even want to think about it.    Even though
Selva says Ravana lost a point, I dont think so.  
>
>>          Now, let me inform you of some ideas or stories of Ravana 
>>         Tamilians KNOW something because Tamil has keys and tamil has a long
>
>This part of the story is not new to me! We see it all along in Telugu 
>movies. The question is not how great a Siva Bhaktha Ravana was! The
>question is he was evil in his abduction of Sita. Period. That is the defining
>aspect. Many of the demons killed by Vishnu (accrding to puranas) are all
>good fellows. Remember the Jaya-Vijaya story. The key is not whether someone
>is good in some respect. Ramayana's focus is on the abduction of the 
>divinely pure Sita.
>
No, Ramayana's focus was about a great king Rama and his life. It is not about
how pure Sita was or How bad Ravana was.  
	In all civilizations stories and epics were told and written as a means
to educate people as there were no schools for the common people. They are equivalent to Movies and TVs of today. But only the Indian civilization glorifies
and put the hero on pedestal and worship them . I cant believe over 1000 years!
And educated people  cannot even discuss rationally about it!?
	Off of my soap box.
I have been following this discussion every day and a lot of good things are coming out
I appreciate Selvas contribution to a lively discussion. This is the only refreshing
topic in this group now. Keep it up guys. 

	For the record - I am a Brahmin - Papan from Tamil Nadu.

Balu