Sambodhi 2001 Vol 24

SR No.: 520774
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Jitendra B Shah, K M Patel
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 2001
Total Pages: 162
Language: English, Sanskrit, Prakrit, Gujarati
Classification: Magazine, India_Sambodhi, & India
File Size: 4 MB

Page 148

Vol. XXIV, 2001
REVIEW
143
Appendix, a Glossary, a Bibliography and an Index. THe Appendix quots the genuine portion of the Bālakānda of Vālmīki's Rāmāyaṇa originally forming the commencement of its Ayodhyākānda.
The objective of this book is to show that thesemyths are at complete variance with the an cient evidence regarding these great men of themost ancient period of Indian history. Thus, for instance, theolder six Purānas, viz., the Vāyu, the Brahmānda, the Kurma, the Brahma, theGaruda and the Visnu do not at all mention the episode of burning of Lankā by Hanumat.
As regards the personalities chosen for each of the chapters, the conclusions of Dr. Bhargave are as follows:
(1) The Uttarakānda, containing the stories of Sītā's banishment and the slaying of Sambuka, was later addition, because the Mahābhārata, th Harivamsa, and five of the ancient Purānas are silent about these two incidents.
(2) A critical sudy of the XII to XIX of the Kişkindhākānda, makes it absolutely clear that the most of the matter in them is interpolated. Theinconsistencies th arose as a result of these interpolations are too glaring to be missed. The fact is that, according to the genuine account of the Ramayana, Rāma killed Bälin in a battle provoked by the latter's attack on him.
(3) The story of Viśvamitra's dalliance with Menakā is a mendacious myth that has undeservedly clouded his spititual greatness. It should be remembered that Viśvāmitra being a contemporaryof Hariscandra, could not at the same time be contemporary of the latter's distant descenant Rāma, as the Rāmāyna would have us believe. None of the stories about the long conflict between him and the sage Vasistha, as also of Viśvāmitra's lapse fin any support from the Vedic literature, nd they are invented by half-educated priess an interpolated in the epics and Puranas.
(4) Paraśurāma was an ancient rși of the Rgvedic age.His father Jamadagni has been clearly mntioedin the Aitareya Brāhmana as contemporary of Hariscandra. Yet both the Rāmāyana and the Mahābhārata have anachronistically made him to suffer defeat in contest with Rāma and Bhisma respectively.
(5) The account of Rādhā contained in the Bhāgavata Purāṇa is full of absurdities. Even if this account wereto be found in all he Purānas, she could not