Itihasas hold a special place in the pantheon of literature works created across the globe. Ramayana as an epic is revered and worshipped by millions across the globe. It is natural that any book remotely related to Ramayana or its subsidiary details would evoke a special interest across believers in the world. Considering the current context where a new Mandir is being created, Ayodhya has a special place in everyone’s prayers and heart. This book about Ayodhya is certain to pique the interest of Bhaktas wide and across, just purely because of the title.
The author has gone to great lengths to explain the context in which this book came about. While the intent to explain the background and rationale in which this book came about, personally I felt it was a little dragged too much as it becomes border line self glorification. This could have been made much crispier for consumption. The author has also provided a good set of background references with Valmiki Ramayan being the sole major reference for the book, which is an excellent decision in my opinion.
In the introduction, the author has quoted that Luv and Kush sang the Ramayana composed by Rsi Valmiki. The verses quoted from Bala Kanda, Sarga 5 are indeed narrated by the prodigious sons of Sri Rama. However, from an accuracy point of view, the first recantation of Ramayana starts in the very first sarga of Bala Kanda where Narada narrates the story of Sri Rama to Valmiki. While Ayodhya description starts from the context of Luv and Kush, Ramayana is narrated in its entirety multiple times across the epic. Just a technicality to note.
In the chapter on Manu, the author has claimed that Ramayana was created in the Treta Yuga of the current cycle. This is not a correct observation when cross-verified with other Puranas. Skanda Purana, Prabhasa Kanda, Prabhasa Kshetra Mahatmya, Chapter 19 clearly provides the date for Ramayana with Rama and his preceptor / Guru Vasishta. When Ishwara is narrating the various avataras of Maha Vishnu, he explains the time in which Jamadagneya (Parashu Rama) followed by Rama were born on the earth and the reasons for their birth. The following verse clearly indicates the timing of Ramayana as Treta of 24th Chatur Yuga [2]
चतुर्विंशे युगे रामो वसिष्ठेन पुरोधसा |
सप्तमो रावणस्यार्थे जाज्ने दशरथात्मजः || 75 ||
Caturvinśē yugē rāmō vasiṣṭhēna purōdhasā |
saptamō rāvaṇasyārthē jajñē daśarathātmajaḥ || 75 ||
The author in the page 7 mentions that “In each Maha Yuga of a manvanthara, a minimum of 10 avataras of Maha Vishnu appear on earth to protect Dharma and the righteous”. While there are many scholars have explained a concept of recurring Itihasas, we need to consider the current proof at hand i.e. Puranas and Itihasas themselves. Sri Krishna’s advise to Arjuna about Dharma धर्मसंस्थापनार्थाय सम्भवामि युगे युगे || doesn’t necessarily mean that Maha Vishnu will adorn an avatara every Yuga. In the context of Srimad Bhagwad Gita, Sri Krishna is sharing his omnipresence by stating that whenever there is a decline in Dharma and increase in Adharma, he would be descend to re-establish Dharma. However, this is not to be considered that every Yuga would have an avatar of Sri Krishna. Maha Vishnu may take avataras or could have amsha avatars or aveshas across time for various purposes. The readers are recommended to consider Krishna by Bhagwan Das which explains this concept clearly. Dasha avatara i.e. 10 avataras is one perspective. However, if we consider Srimad Bhagwatham, there are 24 major avataras. Hence, it may not be prudent to quantify / define boundaries on the avataras per se.
In the past, few authors would equate or compare the Hindu Itihasas and Puranas with Abrahamic religions to reach a wider audience. However, in this book, the author’s equivalence of Swayumbhuva Manu and his wife to Adam and Eve, certainly could have been avoided. Similarly the equivalence of Vaivaswatha Manu to Noah is yet another example. I certainly wished that the author hadn’t pursued on this path.
In page 16, the author has elaborated on the crown that was used for the coronation of Sri Rama. The description is a verbatim reproduction of the content from http://www.valmikiramayan.net/utf8/yuddha/sarga128/yuddha_128_frame.htm verses 64-68. I wish there was some sort of cross reference provided to avoid potential complications in future. This is not one off, but is an often repeated pattern across the book (another example: 1.5.6 translation in Page 29). Finally, in page 62, the author does credit the creator of the site http://www.valmikiramayan.net/ while quoting the description of Yojana.
In the entire description of Manu and his connection with Ayodhya, the author didn’t include a potentially important aspect from Bala Kanda itself. In sarga 70, verse 21, Ikshvaku who is the son of Manu is established to be the king of Ayodhya. While the focus on Manu and various attributes is commendable, Ikshvaku needs additional mention beyond being the progenitor of Solar Dynasty / Suryavamsha.
मनुः प्रजापतिः पूर्वमिक्ष्वाकुश्च मनोः सुतः |
तमिक्ष्वाकुमयोध्यायां राजानं विद्धि पूर्वकम् || १-७०-२१
I find that the author digresses from the main topic and delves into the etymology of words beyond a certain limit. The main focus of Ayodhya and Ramayana is lost to the origins of the word like Puri and how one dictionary relates this to Puri of Pani Puri fame. Quite frankly, instead of relying on some websites, if one refers to any forum that employs a traditional dictionary like Shabdakosha or Apte Sanskrit Dictionary or Monier-Williams, we can find more meaningful examples (Example: https://ambuda.org/texts/ramayanam/1.5 - please select puri in verse 6 and choose the aforementioned dictionaries).
While describing the splendour of Ayodhya and trying to establish Kosala as an empire, the author quotes few verses from couple of Sargas in Bala Kanda. However, the author relies more on the literal translation and considers the same to be the actual meaning instead of considering the same as poetic metaphors to mean a slightly different entity. For example,
तां सत्यनामां दृढतोरणार्गलाम्
गृहैर्विचित्रैरुपशोभितां शिवाम् |
पुरीमयोध्यां नृसहस्रसंकुलाम्
शशास वै शक्रसमो महीपतिः || १-६-२८
In this verse, the author considers Sahasra as thousand and hence, mentions “1,000 provincial kings are in Ayodhya Purii”. There are translations where the same word is translated as “thousands” to indicate a fairly large number than an accurate 1000 number.
In Page 51, where the author is describing Dasaratha’s description of Kosala’s empire, there is a commentary about this verse, where the author argues that Prachinaah should be replaced by Dravidah.
यावदावर्त ते चक्रं तावती मे वसुन्धरा || २-१०-३६
प्राचीनाः सिन्धुसौवीराः सौराष्ट्रा दक्षिणापथाः |
वङ्गाङ्गमगधा मत्स्याः समृद्धाः काशिकोसलाः || २-१०-३७
It’s true that Gita Press edition indeed captures Dravidah instead of Prachinaah, but the meaning of the 2 words and objectives thereof are entirely different. The author tries to impress that Dravidah is required to indicate southern territories, but Dakshinapatha is already present. Prachinaah indicates Eastern territories as captured by the website widely referenced by author too. The same is also cross-referenced with a popular Kannada version which also includes Prachinaah with the meaning of eastern territories. I couldn’t understand the rationale for the author’s affirmation that the correct shloka would read : dravidah Sindhu sauviirah Saurashtrah dakshinapathah. In page 53, the author again reiterates that prachinaah is not factually accurate. The argument is found further down where the author impresses upon the reader that since Videha (in-law kingdom of Sri Rama) was east of Kosala, Dasaratha couldn’t have any eastern frontiers. This could be considered different based on the point of reference. For example, if one considers Ayodhya, the capital as the reference, surely there would be regions (may not be named majorly) that could be bordering Videha. I am a little perplexed about the reasons for rejecting Prachinaah meaning eastern just because Videha is north-eastern to Kosala.
To the author’s credit, I did really appreciate the discussion on the Yojana calculation and reasons for the difference between the most commonly held calculation vs Prabhupada’s definition. This is one section which is fleshed out with good details. However, beyond a point, the author does diverge away from the main topic delving into the dietary habits of Dutch and reasons for their tall height. While trying to establish that the average height of the populace in Ramayana period was greater than 6 ft, the author equates the dietary choices of Dutch with those in Ramayana period. Quite frankly, I am puzzled at these equivalences between a modern data point and quite an ancient data point. As a contrarian point, if Bharatiyas are fed with the same diet today, will they grow to be 7 feet tall?
The section on the moats surrounding Ayodhya and the girdle of trees is quite interesting and informative. The author’s extensive research is well presented to reaffirm the idea. In Page 79, while elaborating on उद्यान-आम्रवण-उपेताम् महतीम् साल-मेखलाम्, the author has translated साल as Sal Tree. Monier-Williams dictionary does provide Sal as one of the translation options. However, in the context, if we refer to Gita Press or other translations, साल is employed to mean generic tree as outlined by Shabdakosha and not a specific variety of the same. The author doesn’t elaborate on the nuances and just presents the Sal tree version. The explanation on kardhani / kamarband is quite unnecessary in the context of the discussion.
There is a recurring pattern in each of the chapters. The author picks up a context (ex: buildings of Ayodhya), considers the verses from Valmiki Ramayana, getting into the specifics of the wordplay and summarising the meaning. However, the discussion diverges into other unrelated topics like gold platting to European invaders taking gold from Peru temples to Tutankhamen’s tomb. These additional details, though informative, derail the reading flow and spoils the overall experience. I wish the author had perhaps considered to keep the addendums to a bare minimum introducing only the relevant ones, which would augment the narrative than becoming a general knowledge exposition.
In the chapter on Shape and Structure of residences, the author comments that “The Matsya Purana, incidentally, contains the story of Manu and his descendants Dasharatha and Sri Rama.” To qualify as Purana, there are 5 lakshanas / requirements of sort, one of which is to encapsulate the vamshacharitha or historical account of both Suryavamsha (Solar Dynasty) and Chandravamsha (Lunar Dynasty). All Puranas need to satisfy these 5 lakshanas to qualify as Purana. Quoting from Matsya Purana,
सर्गश्च प्रतिसर्गश्च वंशो मन्वन्तराणि च । वंश्यानुचरितं चैव पुराणं पञ्चलक्षणम्
In the same chapter, the author describes the various vimanas, their architecture and inferences thereof in great detail. Though deviating from the original topic, this is a well written section which is very informative to the reader.
In Page 126, quoting the author, “The closest we can get to deciphering Vimaanas is to go by the descriptions in the Vimanika Shastra” and further summarises that Pushpaka Vimana was a Sakuma Vimana. Valmiki Ramayana has quite an interesting and detailed description of Pushpaka Vimana. In Yuddha Kanda, Sarga 121, verses 23 - 28 describe the splendour of Pushpaka Vimana in great detail. I am a little surprised that the author didn’t capture this detail in her description.
In page 143, the author mentions that Kaikeyi, while being the favourite queen of Dasharatha, wanted her son Bharatha to inherit the throne and asked for Prince Rama to be banished for 14 years. This is a very narrow view without considering the overall context and events leading to this situation. In Ayodhya Kanda, Sarga 7, when Manthara tries to poison Kaikeyi’s mind, this is her first response:
रामे वा भरते वाहं विशेषं नोपलक्षये |
तस्मात्तुष्टास्मि यद्राजा रामं राज्येऽभिषेक्ष्यति || २-७-३५
"I do not see any difference between Rama and Bharata. That is why, I am happy that Rama is being anointed for crown by the king."
When Kaikeyi had a motherly love and affection for Sri Rama, I wonder why the author took a very narrow view on this topic. Coincidentally, the author has quoted the first verse from the same sarga, but didn’t consider the more important one for the context. While the quoted incident is factually correct over time, the author has the onus to set the context for those who are not familiar with the epic.
While describing the splendour of Kaikeyi’s palace, I am quite shocked to read the equivalence of Valmiki’s description to a modern day contraption, Bar. I mean a Bar in Treta Yuga. I am quite shocked !!! Ref: Page 154 of the book.
Throughout the book, the author keeps referring to her Sangam Talks multiple times. Beyond a limit, this becomes a point of irritation and sort of self aggrandisement, which certainly could have been avoided. The pictures on Page 166 are in monochrome, which defeats the purpose as the author is trying to explain the unique feature of each of the variants, with colour being a dominant feature to distinguish. The prices from the website is another detail that could have been avoided as it doesn’t serve any purpose in the book.
In page 172, the author comments that Lord Rama was specifically trained in the use of baaNa or bow. baaNa is the word for arrow. Dhanus or specifically Kodanda is the word for Bow. Hence, Sri Rama is also known as Kodanda Rama.
In page 194, the author tries to provide a description of Shatagnii from Brahmanda Purana. This is actually a reproduction of content from this page https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/drishadvara where Dṛṣadvara is replaced by Shataghnii. However, there is no reference that connects Dṛṣadvara and Shatagnii.
In page 233, while describing the horses brought into Ayodhya vide this verse
कांभोजविषये जातैर्बाह्लीकैश्च हयोत्तमैः |
वनायुजैर्नदीजैश्च पूर्णा हरिहयोत्तमैः || १-६-२२
The author makes a note that river bed horses are Hippopotamus. In both valmikiramayan.net which the author has frequently derived from or the Gita Press translation, it is clear that the above verse means horses born at the place where rivers flowed. I am not sure if naadijaaH would only mean Hippopotamus, but the author certainly considers this to be the case and writes a few more pages, getting into the discovery of an ancient fossil.
In the concluding part of the book, the author takes a verse from Sri Rama Pattabhisheka and uses the same as Phalasruthi. Personally, I am little flabbergasted and aghast about modern authors claiming Phalasruthi for their works, which at best are commentaries or observations. However, when I did discuss with my friend cum mentor, he did mention that owing to the book, we try to read Ramayana in original form and hence, the original phala would be accrued, albeit in a round about manner. Yet, I personally do wish that the author didn’t include this part in the book.
Some cosmetic issues:
- In page 14, the author quotes the name of the chapter 4 from Srimad Bhagwad Gita as Jyana Yoga instead of Jnana Yoga.
- The choice of font could have been better. 10 comes across as IO, which is awkward. (Ex: Page 172)
Ending note
As a reviewer, I would have certain expectations and the above is a honest opinion on what I found as compared to my expectations i.e. enthralling journey through the very divine Ayodhya. While reviewing and critiquing a book is easy as there is a material to analyse, creating the same requires a lot of effort and dedication. I fully respect the author for her extensive research, referencing various books on Vasatu Shasta, Arthasastra etc.
I do have my own differences on certain content and flow of the book. There is a lot of content from public websites which are quoted as views and observations here. I would recommend this book only to rank beginners. However, for real asaktas, I would highly recommending investing in the Gita Press edition and reading through the same.
Reviewer’s References:
1. Ramayan http://valmikiramayan.pcriot.com/
2. Skanda Purana extract: https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/the-skanda-purana/d/doc626807.html
3. Ramayan with word meanings : https://ambuda.org/texts/ramayanam/
4. Srimad Valmiki Ramayana (Kannada) - Gita Press
5. Srimad Valmiki Ramayanam (Kannada) - Vid. N. Ranganatha Sharma
Recommended Reading:
1. Krishna - Bhagwan Das
2. Srimad Valmiki Ramayana - Gita Press edition with shlokas and meaning
Comments