Talk:Ramayana/Archive 1

message: I've started a section called "Historical evidence" that records the various archeological reveals that point to the historical significance of Ramayana. All those of you from different parts of India, please add the points from your nearest ancient city, with pictures of archeoloical/religious monuments that are said to be related to that. --H P Nadig 03:27, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ramayana and History 

message: I came across this artical which dates Ramayana around 3000 BCE as is clear from the description of astronomical events in Ramayana, but if you go through Mahabharat then it is also dated around 3700 BCE. Did the two epics evolved around the same time? Is the fact of Ramayana being atleast 10000 years older than Mahabharat false? My head is spinning. Experts please clarify.
Subhash Kamboj
                                   Here's Clarification(24th Jan 2006)
If we can decide the time of Ramayana, MahaBharat time can be easily determined by the 
fact that King Shalya who took over the fighting on Kaurava's side after the death of Karna was 50th generation from Luv and Kush (Rama's sons). Lets take an average of 40 years for each generation, that would mean atleast 2000 years as the difference between Ramayan and Mahabharat. This would mean if Mahabharat happened is dated around 3700 B.C., then Ramayan could be easily dated as somewhere near to 3700+2000 = 5700 B.C. But taking into consideration the average age of Human at that time as around atleast 80 years as it has been mentioned in a lot of ancient books that the Humans had a high life expectancy. It would mean that 50 generations is equivalent to 4000(50*80)years, which would mean that Ramayan happened nearly in 7800 B.C. which is what a lot of old scripts from India point to. According to Valmiki Ramayan's star formation it can be calculated that Ramayan did happen somewhere between 7000-8000 B.C. which is around 10000 years from now. 
Mayank B. Prasad
The date of the Ramayana has the be older than that of the Mahabharata. Rama is mentioned in the Mahabharata many times. Hanuman was half man, half ape. Hanuman is also mentioned in the Mahabharata. How many years ago did whe see the last Neantherthalers? Mayank I am adding your comments in the main article, you have valid points.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
25-AUG-2006: There is more to this around 1 Million Years ago the first anatomically modern humans (Homo sapiens) appear in Africa some time before this, they evolved from Homo heidelbergensis, and the Neanderthals were around till 270,000 Years ago. The scientist stillbelieve that there is a missing link somewhere in the evolution of the modern man. The same missing could have been the apes that were around during the Ramayan Period and Hanuman was one of the other intelligent species other than the Homo Sapiens. And according to our 
epics they were present during the ramayan period but were not mentioned anywhere in the epics depicting the mahabharat period. There are many more facts which need to brought under light, I will keep on adding newer findings from my side. Lets hope we have more inputs from others also
::I do not think historian Sankalia and Basham (his dating is particularly absurd) have made correct assessments. Please let me mention that Alexanders historians in 323 BC mentioned a Ramakoop (Rama's well) with bubbling mud in Baluchistan, the wells (or more correctly geysers) still exist in Gwadar region of Pakistan (As reported by Alexander Cunningham, Surveyor-General, Archeological Survey of India, in the British times). So Rama's story was that pervasive in India even at that early time. Indian folk stories, myths, and scriptures did not require writing down because people learned them by heart. Even after writing is with us for two or three millenia, Indians still learn Vedas by heart, and consider that to be the best way. Written matter does not give information on the stress to be given on various words and the sound. It would be an insufficient method of passing down Vedic verses and how they should be sung. Aupmanyav 18:13, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dating of Ramayana 

message: What is the oldest extant manuscript of Ramayana? Do we still have the original writings of Valmiki from 4th-2nd century BCE? --Itinerant1 23:04, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  No experts in this field, but you're able to give percentage statistics, or are they just speculations? Dwayne Kirkwood 09:06, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Manuscripts 

message: "Just like Christians historically believe in the birth of Jesus, people of the Hindu religion believe in the birth of Rāma."
Does this phrase really need to stay? It seems to presume a bias towards Christianity (or at least presume inherent knowledge of Christianity) on the part of the reader, and it seems out of place. Kobresia 04:38, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, you are right, it is out of place, i have removed it. --vineeth 06:07, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minor Question 

message: I believe the king Dasharatha died as a result of a curse - can anybody with more information add the relevant text?
Shreekar 06:04, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Death of Dasharatha 

message: No need to mention political aspects in the text related to Some landmarks related to Ramayana - Ayodhya. I will be removing these references if no compelling reason is given.
Shreekar 06:04, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unnecessary for politics to come in here 

message: While I accept that certain Hindus may take the Ramayana as literally true,the archeological evidence does not back up the time estimates made here.  That persons in the epic may have been neandrethal or sub-human is also an unlikely proposition.  Perhaps an accurate attempt at dating the oral and textual representations would provide some context as to revisionism over time and the correlation of events to the historical record.
:: All of the dead would have been thrown into the ganga, or burned, as is the custom. So, it is not surprising that there is little archeological evidence. The lack of evidence doesn't mean that the dates are wrong however. Dwayne Kirkwood 05:38, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Lack of evidence does not mean the dates are wrong, but by the same token it also means they are not absolutely right either. The second para in the lead section is full of POV and original research. I am moving it to a separate section on Dating Ramayana - Parthi 23:49, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Archeological Correlations 

message: Hey Venu62, are you planning on reworking all of this article? I'm curious if you're planning on renaming all of the headers in the section "Story of Rāmāyaņa". If so, perhaps this can be done in advanced? Looks messy as most of the titles are named "BOOK III" etc, while your new titles don't have this prefix. Personally I'd prefer that the Book titles were kept, rather than being changed (the book titles are useful for reference). Dwayne Kirkwood 03:07, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Dwayne, I am in the process of rewriting the story section. I think it will be more readable if the story is given without sticking to the original canto structure of Valmiki Ramayana. I am also intending to add a section after the story giving the sturucture of the book with its canto titles. I am also changing the tense of the story into past from the current present tense. I should be finished tonight, but I had to wake up early to see the Socceroos go through to round 2. So I don't know how long I will be up tonight. I shouls finish it on the weekend though - Cheers Parthi 03:34, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Current Work (23-06-06) 

message: Are we referring to the Ramayana as "the Ramayana" or "Ramayana"? The usage doesn't seem to be uniform throughout the article. --Kaushik twin 06:31, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It should probably be just 'Ramayana' - Parthi 11:02, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Style that we use 

message: How does
:In its current form the Valmiki Ramayana is dated variously from the fifth century to the first century BCE. It has gone through many interpolations, making it impossible to accurately date it using internal evidence. Some historians have proposed that hidden within its Hindu religious imagery is the story of the migration of the Vedic religion to the Deccan and the peninsular India.
fit with the Weasel words criteria?
- Parthi 06:41, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it is not anon, the sentense is cited. - Parthi 10:58, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weasel words? 

message: Why were they removed? It is accurate to include them in the article. I believe we should re-add them. Nobleeagle  (Talk) 10:35, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Because the article is not only about Valmiki Ramayana, but Ramayana in general. There is a section detailing the structure of Valmiki Ramayana, the oldest version of Ramayana available - Parthi 11:00, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Book Titles 

message: My edition of the Ramayana, which I bought near a temple in India, although it shouldn't make much of a difference. Has an extra chapter, the Lava-Kusha Kanda, however, when I added it it was promptly removed without any notice...is it just my edition that has the chapter then? Or is the story of Lava and Kusha detailed in the Uttara Kanda in other editions. Nobleeagle  (Talk) 23:58, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: An anonymous user removed it, however all the version version I have seen have only seven. Without actually seeing the book, I can only guess that in your edition, the Uttara Kanada has been split into two. - Parthi 00:30, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You're probably right, I won't readd it then. Nobleeagle  (Talk) 00:39, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lava-Kusha Kanda 

message: ::Navjivan Trust of MK Gandhi has published in Gujarati Language Ramayana in Historical Perspective by Hasmukhlal Sankalia. The reader of this article will be benefited if somebody will give the information in short.
:::vkvora 17:58, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ramayana and Book by Hasmukhlal Sankalia : Navjivan Trust 

message: This article needs to include a section on the various English translations of the Ramayana. As with any great piece of literature, translations often play a major role in the interpretation of the text. For  example, one of the most widely read translations of the Ramayana in the American academic context is the translation by Arshia Sattar. Sattar's translation often takes precedence in American universities because of the measured use of more contemporary language, which makes this particular translation more accessible to a non-native audience. 
--JupiterMoon 09:05, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  English Translations 

message: Shouldn't there be a spoiler tag somewhere in this article? Or is this accepted for ancient literatures? Aurora sword 03:28, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spoiler 

message: The article has Ram, Raam, and Rama. Should there be an agreement on a spelling to use consistently?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.40.154.10 (talk) 13:59, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Transliteration 

message: I've added the details. Kindly comment. BalanceΩrestored Talk 06:31, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is okay but remember that this page is for the Ramayana, not Rama specifically. GizzaDiscuss © 07:04, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rama birth in [[Treta Yuga]] 

message: There is Balmikism Tag added to article, It seems Balmikism is a sect which treats Valmiki as God. This article is not proper place to put it.
it can be put in Valmiki article. I'll remove this tag if there is a consensus.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lokesh 2000 (talk • contribs) 05:38, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Balmikism. 

message: The image embedded in this page is wrong.  As per ramayana, Ravana never touched Sita.
----
The image is by renowned artist Raja Ravi verma. The imagery is as per his imagination and can not be declared right or wrong.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 05:26, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image in thispage is wrong 

message: The Ram setu history part is completely biased.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.193.143.137 (talk) 14:04, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Cleaned it up. -- Hidoshi (talk) 11:22, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ram bridge 

message: I've gone over parts of the article, correcting spellings and cleaning up some biases. And interesting point: Both Shiva and Brahma tend to crop up in different versions of this story. If I'm not mistaken however, Ravana prayed to Shiva because Shiva is impartial, supporting both Gods, Humans, and Demons in all their quests. However a popular notion is that whenever Shiva grants a boon to a powerful demon, he immediately tells Vishnu so that a balance may be maintained. Additionally, one of the Jyotirlingas in India was given to Ravana, but he couldn't carry it all the way and was forced to set it down. If I'm not mistaken, this is shortly after he obtained his boon from Shiva. If the boon was from Brahma, how could it be that Ravana had a Jyotirlingam with him? I would take that as a more accurate version of the story. -- Hidoshi (talk) 11:21, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inconsistencies and Biases 

message: Does anyone have access to ? It was a good collection of essays on the epic and can be used as a source here. I might have a copy lying around somewhere.
Vtria 08 (talk) 22:58, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Found it. Hope to use it soon. Vtria 08 (talk) 23:08, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  
Oxford Source 

message: This is driving me crazy- can anybody cite for me the story of the bow line drawn around Sita- does it appear in Valmiki? I have read the silly William Buck version, the Krishna Dharma version, and the 1870 translation translated by Ralph T. H. Griffith, printed by "Forgotten Books". Both the William Buck and the Krishna Dharma versions include the story of the bow, but the translation does not include it. So I think that this story comes from later sources- maybe the Tulsidas version? I am pretty sure that the episode is missing from the original: I have looked on the verse-by-verse translation of the Valmiki text provided by this website and it is missing there, too. So I think it's not there in Valmiki. David G Brault (talk) 05:43, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The line is called Lakshmana rekha and does not appear in Valmiki's Ramayana (see ), although it is mentioned in later versions. It would be interesting to find out when this bit was first added. Abecedare (talk) 06:31, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Line Drawn Around Sita Story 

message: What is the plot summary here a plot summary of? It seems to me it is either a summary of the Tulsidas Ramayana or the TV serial- fine for either of those articles, but this is the Ramayana, period- that implies Valmiki Ramayana. If nobody has a problem with that, I would like to try to rewrite the summary to confirm to the Valmiki Ramayana. I will put a note describing the differences between the Valmiki and other versions. Sarga-by-sarga citations to the Valmiki text in the summary by this website would be nice. David G Brault (talk) 07:28, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I for one have no problem with your proposal; it would be good not to have a mish-mash (even though I don't agree that this article is only about the Valmiki Ramayana). As you say, the Valmiki Ramayana can be summarized with citations, and the significant points of departure between that and other "prominent" Ramayanas can be noted either in the maintext or the footnote. Happy editing. Abecedare (talk) 16:52, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  By the way, is there some better source than the website that can be used ? The  two contributors are not exactly scholars (, ). Abecedare (talk) 16:56, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Valmiki" Ramayana 

message: The article states Ramayana to be set in the Dwapara Yuga, but every child knows that Sri Ramachandra was an avatar of Treta Yuga. Even corresponding entries on Treta and Dwapara on Wikipedia itself do not concur with this Ramayana article. Can any responsible person help please? 
Vivek  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.148.74.246 (talk) 20:18, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible Anomaly : Dwapara or Treta? 

message: Another missing piece is that of Valmiki... what circumstances made him compose the Ramayana. Probably a small para on this will be good . --Nvineeth (talk) 09:11, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Valmiki 

message: Found this para inappropriate in synopsis: Add some interpretation section. --Redtigerxyz  Talk  06:16, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, this belongs to interpretation section, if it is not a OR. I would have removed it in any case, from the story section. Thanks. --Nvineeth (talk) 08:02, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Synopsis: out of place para 

message: Hi all. I've noticed the  banner at the top of the foreign adaptations section. You might find useful material in last year's version of this article. Next edit has substantially shortened the article and it seems deleted sections never went back contrary to editor's initial intent. — Xavier, 23:38, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Good observation. The rationale behind removing the referencing sections is unknown. I am restoring those sections.--Redtigerxyz  Talk  16:56, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  I am not so sure about the accuracy of the entire text, some unreferenced so I am putting some text in comments.--Redtigerxyz  Talk  17:11, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  It needs little cleanup. --Redtigerxyz  Talk  17:18, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Material for the ''foreign adaptations'' section 

message: I am in the process of building of the family tree of Rama. Layout. 
* Dasharatha · Kausalya · Sumitra · Kaikeyi
* Janaka 
*  Rama · Bharata · Lakshmana · Shatrughna
** Rama's sister: Shanta married to Ekashringa
* wives: Sita · Urmila · Mandavi · Shrutakirti 
* Lava and Kusha
Family tree of Ravana
* Pulastya
* Visravas
** Idvidaa --> Kubera
* Malyavan - Tataki  Sumali
**Maricha
**Kekasi (wife of Visravas, Ravana's mother)
*  Ravana · Kumbhakarna ·  Vibhishana · Surpanakha 
* Mandodari (father Mayasura)
* son: Indrajit, who are the other important children of Ravana
Anyone to add or delete. Suggestions?
--Redtigerxyz  Talk  11:47, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I have heard (but don't have exact textual references to back me up) that Malyavan was actually Ravan's grand-uncle and the older brother of Sumali, who was actually Ravan's grandfather (i.e., Kekasi's father). Furthermore, I know that Tataka is the mother of Maricha, but I'm not sure that she is actually Ravan's grandmother. She is sometimes referred to as such, just as Maricha is often referred to as Ravan's "uncle," but it could be that there is actually more of a cousin relationship than a direct relationship. I'm not sure... --Hnsampat (talk) 21:18, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: List of Characters from Buck will be useful. --Nvineeth (talk) 05:51, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There are too many characters in the Ramayana, I wanted help to narrow down to the important ones needed in the family tree. --Redtigerxyz  Talk  05:58, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  No I did not mean to include all the characters :) I added the above link so that we can consult it if we have confusions like Hnsampat had. I am unaware of several characters in the family tree, so thought this could be helpful. Just one small suggestion, it is better to follow this order : "Rama · Lakshmana · Bharata · Shatrughna" (). I think maricha does not belong to the family tree, because he was the son of a slain demoness Tataki.(). Also we may include Khara, a brother of Ravana (he is not very famous though)  --Nvineeth (talk) 06:25, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

text: We're going to have to be pretty careful here. There's a lot of disagreement and a lot of different versions of this family tree in the various versions of the Ramayana. The biggest example of this is one South Indian version (and, I think, one Assamese version), in which it is stated that Sita was actually the secret daughter of Ravan and Mandodari. (The story here is supposedly that Mandodari gave birth to Sita in the forest to hide her from Ravan, then buried the child alive, in the same spot where Janak would then find the baby Sita...and so Ravan kidnapping Sita to make her his wife was the ultimate sin, as marrying her would unknowingly be incest.) Also, different regions refer to the same characters by different names. (She's not part of the family tree, but for illustrative purposes, Manthara is referred to as "Kooni" in South Indian versions.) Also, as far as I know, Khar was actually Ravan's cousin, but not his brother per se (i.e., I do not believe that Khar was the son of Vishrava or Kekasi). I have always heard that Vishrava and Kekasi's only children were Ravan, Kumbhakarna, Vibhishan, and Surpankha. So, yes, we're going to have to try some REALLY good sources here. --Hnsampat (talk) 21:06, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  To avoid disputes, I think we should stick to Valmiki Ramayana. --Redtigerxyz  Talk  04:06, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree on using Valmiki's Ramayana. Is there any progress in the family tree? Is anyone still working on it? I came across Ramayana Cast of Characters and The Ramayana - Characters & Places in the Great Hindu Epic. Is it acceptable to add the second one in the external links section? Wiki-uk (talk) 06:01, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: See Wikipedia:Family_trees for layout guidelines. Wiki-uk (talk) 10:27, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Family tree 

message: I'd like to change the distinguish link to Ramayan (TV series) to a link to a dab where other topics will also be covered: Kamba Ramayanam, The Ramayana (R. K. Narayan) and others that I'm searching for (there should be one for Rajaji's translation!). I'll get that done once I have all the current links ready. -SpacemanSpiffCalvin‡Hobbes 20:03, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Distinguish vs dab 

message: See recent edits, now reverted. Most of them are silly (changing the names of articles etc.), but one or two might be worth changing. Shreevatsa (talk) 14:37, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nepal, etc. 

message: Is it Ram or Rama? Krishn Or Krishna? Buddha or Buddh? Karma or Karm? Ramayana or Ramayan? Mahabahrata or Mahabarat? 71.105.87.54 (talk) 19:47, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Typical doubt of North Indians. "a" is not added in end of any word in Hindi (and English), while that is present in Sanskrit and South Indian languages. Doorvery far (talk) 03:59, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: First you don't have to turn this into a North South Indian thing. Im representing India homie....Secondly......What are you saying? that it is not added in Hindi or English becuase it was their in Sansrkti and South Indian languages? 71.105.87.54 (talk) 08:46, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It is indeed a typical north indian doubt. Most of the hindu names are in fact sanskrit words with specific meaning(s). All sanskrit names have their meaning and end with last "a". For example, "Bhaskara" (Bhaskar in hindi), "Sudarshana" (Sudarshan in hindi).In Hindi, this last "a" is ommitted due to persian/urdu influence. But this is not so in south indian languages where original sanskrit words are preserved properly. In academic literature original sanskrit names are used, such as "Rama" instead of "Ram". people who know only hindi forms get surprised to see Ram spelt as Rama.    Lokesh 2000 (talk) 15:29, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

text: So doesn't Hindi come from Sanskrit? If the original meaning's have an a at the end then why does Hindi not? I mean I understand Hindi might be influenced with some Persian and Urdu. But Hindi is still Hindi. And doesnt it come from Sanskrit then here? So are you sure most of the word's should have an "a" at the end? Someone gave me a  link, which I opened, but for example it said something like I think how Siva , became Siv. Now if this is partly due to Persian and / or Urdu influce then, well im confused cus in Persia people have the name Shiva. So they still kept the "a" at the end then. So what does that mean? Does it depend on the word? Or what then? If you don't mind me asking then. Ok thank you here. 71.105.87.54 (talk) 00:22, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The "a" at the end of some words is because according to Sanskrit, it's not polite to end words with abrupt endings, specially nouns. This is why in Sanskrit, lot of words have "aha" (colon or :) at the end of the word, to make the pronunciation of the word soft. The same rule is followed in South Indian or Dravidan languages. Ashish Sharma (talk) 12:47, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is their sometime's an "a" at the of Hindu names? 

message: Both translations by Dutt are condensed or abridged. 68.54.107.114 (talk) 16:35, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neither of the translations by Dutt are complete 

message: Is this article on Rama or Professor Ram Sharam Sharma???  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.242.38.50 (talk) 05:11, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. Fixed. Dougweller (talk) 05:39, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is the need of "Professor Ram Sharan Sharma, one of the two most renowned living historians of early India (the other being Professor Romila Thapar)," 

message: what were the names of sravanakumar's parent's? his parents were killed by dasharatha.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.215.46.162 (talk) 13:30, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  sravanakumar's parents 

message: Hello All,
It seems there is nothing written here ascertaining the historicity of Ramayana.
Most of us here are Hindus and we believe in Rama as god. We should find/show evidence that Lord Rama did exist as a historical person and present it in the wikipedia. Lot of us Hindus out of "adult-ego" say "historicity of Rama" is debatable.
Let us not get logical but accept by our religion that Rama is certainly a real historical character. Let us accept that it is IMPOSSIBLE that Rama is unhistorical and lets find proofs for saying the same.
Thanks,  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Esrujan (talk • contribs) 22:25, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historicity of Ramayana 

message: Hi Guys
I lookup on the internet and tried to find that who hold the original (i am talking about the original, physical thing on which Ramayana was written) Ramayana these days?
Is that the Indian Government or some hindu religious organisation?
P.S. there are lot of internet version of Ramayana available and I am fully aware about that. So, please do NOT direct me to those internet links.
211.31.254.67 (talk) 04:43, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no original Ramayana manuscript. After its creation, the Ramayana was passed down orally for many years before being copied onto manuscripts. The manuscripts, mostly made from palm leaves, deteriorated over time, and so were copied and recopied, generation after generation. There are two manuscript traditions (recensions), one from the north and the other from the south, with two ‘sub-recensions’: a northeastern and a northwestern. Almost everyone agrees that the southern recension is the most authoritative. The critical edition created by Bhatt and Shah in 1975 used over 37 different manuscripts, which are held in different museums and research institutes around India. Beecher70 (talk) 03:58, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  who holds the original script of Ramayana? 

message: Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that :File:Battle at Lanka, Ramayana, Udaipur, 1649-53.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on October 30, 2011. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2011-10-30. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :) Thanks! howcheng  {chat} 17:33, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:File:Battle at Lanka, Ramayana, Udaipur, 1649-53.jpg]] to appear as POTD soon 

message: The Translator of Valmeeki Ramayana Ralph Griffith also ends with Rama's consecration and this is what he says about Uttara Kaanda -
The Rámáyan ends, epically complete, with the triumphant return of Ráma and his rescued queen to Ayodhyá and his consecration and coronation in the capital of his forefathers. Even if the story were not complete, the conclusion of the last Canto of the sixth Book, evidently the work of a later hand than Válmíki's, which speaks of Ráma's glorious and happy reign and promises blessings to those who read and hear the Rámáyan, would be sufficient to show that, when these verses were added, the poem was considered to be finished. The Last Book is merely an appendix or a supplement and relates only events antecedent and subsequent to those described in the original poem.
Hindu texts typically end with a verse or verses that describe the religious merit or reading the text. These verses are calledPhalasrutis. Curiously in the Valmiki Ramayana, the Phalasrutis occur at the end of 6th Kanda, which indicates that the entire Uttarakanda is a later addition.
Lava and Kusha were called  Prince when they arrived at Valmiki Ashram  to learn Valmiki Ramayana  and were called son of Rama . 
I don't know why the editor of this page deleted my posts . Monkeys are editor and this is like gun in the hand of monkeys . They can shoot anyone and no action can be taken as  per constitution .  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noyanika (talk • contribs) 05:19, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Uttara Kanda a later hand 

message: please?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.142.249.134 (talk) 05:47, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  is Ramayana the same things as Ramine? 

message: The Wikipedia page of Mahabharata says with citation:
"The oldest preserved parts of the text are thought to be not much older than around 400 BCE, though the origins of the epic probably fall between the 8th and 9th centuries BCE."
It is an established fact that Ramayana is older than Mahabharata. Valmeeki lived during Rama's time (since Ramayana was written during Rama's time), and Rama lived before Vyasa's time (Vyasa has mentioned Rama many times in Mahabharata, for example Arjuna uses a chariot while fighting a war for Indra, which was previously used by Rama). Why then is the textual history of Ramayana given as 5th to 4th century BCE?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.184.143.186 (talk) 11:05, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Textual History 

message: The extra "a" in the great epics Ramayan and Mahabharat reflects the anglicization of these Hindu epics by the Britishers. The British literature and the subsequent Indian adaptations had the habit of adding extra "a" to all the Hindu Gods and epics. This is not the case with "Quran" or "Mohammad", but only with "Ramayana" and "Mahabharata".
This is a request to all to please look into the matter and support to remove this anglicised "a" from these articles.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.212.144.141 (talk) 09:08, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  The name Ramayana is anglicized 

message: Just wondering if a decision was made to not include anything related to historicity of the ramayana, is it a moot point?  Was expecting that would be there for sure so I'm quite surprised.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by AZG1001 (talk • contribs) 13:26, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  No category for historicity? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Ramayana. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120715090440/http://www.tititudorancea.com/z/mahabharata_ramopakhyana_parva.htm to http://www.tititudorancea.com/z/mahabharata_ramopakhyana_parva.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090110180550/http://www.hinduonnet.com:80/thehindu/fr/2005/08/12/stories/2005081201210200.htm to http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/fr/2005/08/12/stories/2005081201210200.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:53, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The source seems dubious acc. Wikipedia:FRINGE, WP:NPOV, and WP:RS bearing in mind that Indus valley civilisation only arose around this point. The article should be clear that it is not suggesting that the epic is that old. The reference to the use of metal in the Epic makes any suggestion before the iron age ridiculous.
: The statement 'any suggestion before the iron age ridiculous' is WP:NPOV and WP:FRINGE. Anyway, the source claims that it was the birth of Rama not the time during which it was penned down. If you have any alternate source, you are free to cite them as well as a counter argument. Simply because it doesn't sound correct (to you), isn't a worthy enough argument for discussion. Crawford88 (talk) 06:04, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  You have really trashed this wiki-article and reduced it to a laughing stock instead of respectable encyclopedia reference article. if I was more bothered I would have argued with you on this, but go ahead make a fool out of yourself at your own peril. I will just amuse myself from the sidelines as an observer J mareeswaran (talk) 13:12, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

text: I-SERVE's claims based on "'Considerable research' and a software procured for around Rs 7,000 from the US" are utter fringe. And as Crawford himself admits, purported birtdates for a mythological figure are not related to the dates on which the related text was composed. Abecedare (talk) 14:56, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dating and Planetarium software 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Ramayana. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20101027001647/http://www.hinduonnet.com:80/thehindu/fr/2005/08/12/stories/2005081201210200.htm to http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/fr/2005/08/12/stories/2005081201210200.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:42, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I'm going to change this article to refer to "the Ramayana" and "the Mahabharata" rather than just "Ramayana" and "Mahabharata". The first way is the normal way to refer to epics in English, as in "the Odyssey" or "the Shahnameh". For example, look at the versions by R. K. Narayan, by Ramesh Menon, and by Rosalind Lefeber.—Neil P. Quinn (talk) 22:20, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Using "the" before "Ramayana" 

message: Should the third to last word for the first sentence be "Krishna" rather than "Krsna"? 70.174.165.155 (talk) 01:03, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe, yes. Krsna is a spelling for Krishna used in very specific cases by specific organization. It doesn't bother me, tbh but I don't mind an edition either. Crawford88 (talk) 05:04, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Misspelling? 

message: Please use the spellings that correspond to the spellings used in the pages being linked to. Changing the spellings leads either to redlinks or to redirects, neither of which are desirable. Thanks, Aristophanes68 (talk) 02:11, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please don't change the standard spellings