Guest guest Posted June 6, 2004 Report Share Posted June 6, 2004 >Dear PKR, Yes, of course in the Valmiki Ramayana somewhere in the 80-90 sargas of the Ayodhya Kanda (I am writing from the airport and don't have the exact reference handy) Rama tells Bharata a family secret. What he tells him is that at the time that D. negotiated the marriage with Kaikeyi's father, the latter set as a condition for the match that his daughter should be regarded as rAjyazulkA, ie. a girl whose bride price is the succession of the kingdom for her son. Rama uses this information as part of his argument that Bharata should accept the kingship. See Pollock's translation and notes. >In a conversation with Sathya Sai Baba, it is reported that he had said - > >"At the time of Kaikeyi's wedding with Dasaratha, her father, the >king of Kekaya had made known his desire: "O King Dasaratha! You >have contemplated marriage with my daughter, Kaikeyi, in order to >have progeny. Then, it is her son, who should become king, your >successor, shouldn't he? Is this acceptable to you? If your queens >Kausalya or Sumitra give birth to sons, Kaikeyi's son would lose the >right to kingship, wouldn't he?" King Dasaratha listened to this >wish, consulted Kausalya and Sumitra in the matter, apprised them of >the implications, and won their approval." > >Is there any reference to this in any of the Puranas/Ithihasas? > >PKRamakrishnan > > > > > >Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Messenger > > Links > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 6, 2004 Report Share Posted June 6, 2004 Dear RG, I have Valmiki Ramayanam in Sanskrit, I could not locate any portion of Rama telling Bharatha of Dasaratha giving any such promise to his father-in-law Kekaya. I have no access to Pollock's Translation. PKR Robert Goldman <sseas wrote: >Dear PKR, Yes, of course in the Valmiki Ramayana somewhere in the 80-90 sargas of the Ayodhya Kanda (I am writing from the airport and don't have the exact reference handy) Rama tells Bharata a family secret. What he tells him is that at the time that D. negotiated the marriage with Kaikeyi's father, the latter set as a condition for the match that his daughter should be regarded as rAjyazulkA, ie. a girl whose bride price is the succession of the kingdom for her son. Rama uses this information as part of his argument that Bharata should accept the kingship. See Pollock's translation and notes. >In a conversation with Sathya Sai Baba, it is reported that he had said - > >"At the time of Kaikeyi's wedding with Dasaratha, her father, the >king of Kekaya had made known his desire: "O King Dasaratha! You >have contemplated marriage with my daughter, Kaikeyi, in order to >have progeny. Then, it is her son, who should become king, your >successor, shouldn't he? Is this acceptable to you? If your queens >Kausalya or Sumitra give birth to sons, Kaikeyi's son would lose the >right to kingship, wouldn't he?" King Dasaratha listened to this >wish, consulted Kausalya and Sumitra in the matter, apprised them of >the implications, and won their approval." > >Is there any reference to this in any of the Puranas/Ithihasas? > >PKRamakrishnan > > > > > >Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Messenger > > Links > > > > INDOLOGY/ INDOLOGY Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Messenger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 6, 2004 Report Share Posted June 6, 2004 Dear P. K. Ramakrishnan, The exact reference for the passage referred to by R. Goldman is 2.99.3, in the Critical Edition. The Sanskrit text reads: purA bhrAtaH pitA naH sa mAtaraM te samudvahan mAtAmahe samAzrauSId rajyazulkam anuttamam Regards, Luis Gonzalez-Reimann _________ At 10:08 AM 6/6/2004 -0700, you wrote: >Dear RG, > >I have Valmiki Ramayanam in Sanskrit, I could not locate any portion of >Rama telling Bharatha of Dasaratha giving any such promise to his >father-in-law Kekaya. I have no access to Pollock's Translation. >PKR > >Robert Goldman <sseas wrote: > >Dear PKR, > > >Yes, of course in the Valmiki Ramayana somewhere in the 80-90 sargas >of the Ayodhya Kanda (I am writing from the airport and don't have >the exact reference handy) Rama tells Bharata a family secret. What >he tells him is that at the time that D. negotiated the marriage with >Kaikeyi's father, the latter set as a condition for the match that >his daughter should be regarded as rAjyazulkA, ie. a girl whose bride >price is the succession of the kingdom for her son. Rama uses this >information as part of his argument that Bharata should accept the >kingship. > >See Pollock's translation and notes. > > > >In a conversation with Sathya Sai Baba, it is reported that he had said - > > > >"At the time of Kaikeyi's wedding with Dasaratha, her father, the > >king of Kekaya had made known his desire: "O King Dasaratha! You > >have contemplated marriage with my daughter, Kaikeyi, in order to > >have progeny. Then, it is her son, who should become king, your > >successor, shouldn't he? Is this acceptable to you? If your queens > >Kausalya or Sumitra give birth to sons, Kaikeyi's son would lose the > >right to kingship, wouldn't he?" King Dasaratha listened to this > >wish, consulted Kausalya and Sumitra in the matter, apprised them of > >the implications, and won their approval." > > > >Is there any reference to this in any of the Puranas/Ithihasas? > > > >PKRamakrishnan > > > > > > > > > > > >Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Messenger > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Links > > > > > > > > > > > Sponsor > > > > Links > > ><INDOLOGY/>INDOLOGY\ / > > >INDOLOGY > > > > > > > > >Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Messenger > > > > > > Sponsor > ><http://rd./SIG=129as6g0h/M=298184.5022502.6152625.3001176/D=groups/S=\ 1705082353:HM/EXP=1086632402/A=2164331/R=0/SIG=11eaelai9/*http://www.netflix.com\ /Default?mqso=60183351>aaef75.jpg >aaefe3.jpg > > >---------- > Links > * > * > <INDOLOGY/>INDOLOGY/ > > * > * > * > <INDOLOGY?subject=Un>INDOLOGY-unsubs\ cribe > > * > * Your use of is subject to the > <> ---------- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 7, 2004 Report Share Posted June 7, 2004 In the present context it may be relevant to recall that while Dasaratha belonged to the Suryavansh (patrilineally from Iksvaku), Kekayi was from Chandravansh . Rajesh Kochhar ------------------------- Original Message ----- "Luis Gonzalez-Reimann" <reimann <INDOLOGY> Monday, June 07, 2004 6:40 AM Re: [Y-Indology] Condition for Kaikeyi's marriage. | Dear P. K. Ramakrishnan, | | | The exact reference for the passage referred to by R. Goldman is 2.99.3, in | the Critical Edition. The Sanskrit text reads: | | purA bhrAtaH pitA naH sa mAtaraM te samudvahan | mAtAmahe samAzrauSId rajyazulkam anuttamam | | | Regards, | | Luis Gonzalez-Reimann | _________ | | | At 10:08 AM 6/6/2004 -0700, you wrote: | >Dear RG, | > | >I have Valmiki Ramayanam in Sanskrit, I could not locate any portion of | >Rama telling Bharatha of Dasaratha giving any such promise to his | >father-in-law Kekaya. I have no access to Pollock's Translation. | >PKR | > | >Robert Goldman <sseas wrote: | > >Dear PKR, | > | > | >Yes, of course in the Valmiki Ramayana somewhere in the 80-90 sargas | >of the Ayodhya Kanda (I am writing from the airport and don't have | >the exact reference handy) Rama tells Bharata a family secret. What | >he tells him is that at the time that D. negotiated the marriage with | >Kaikeyi's father, the latter set as a condition for the match that | >his daughter should be regarded as rAjyazulkA, ie. a girl whose bride | >price is the succession of the kingdom for her son. Rama uses this | >information as part of his argument that Bharata should accept the | >kingship. | > | >See Pollock's translation and notes. | > | > | > >In a conversation with Sathya Sai Baba, it is reported that he had said - | > > | > >"At the time of Kaikeyi's wedding with Dasaratha, her father, the | > >king of Kekaya had made known his desire: "O King Dasaratha! You | > >have contemplated marriage with my daughter, Kaikeyi, in order to | > >have progeny. Then, it is her son, who should become king, your | > >successor, shouldn't he? Is this acceptable to you? If your queens | > >Kausalya or Sumitra give birth to sons, Kaikeyi's son would lose the | > >right to kingship, wouldn't he?" King Dasaratha listened to this | > >wish, consulted Kausalya and Sumitra in the matter, apprised them of | > >the implications, and won their approval." | > > | > >Is there any reference to this in any of the Puranas/Ithihasas? | > > | > >PKRamakrishnan | > > | > > | > > | > > | > > | > >Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Messenger | > > | > > | > > | > > | > > | > > | > > | > > | > > Links | > > | > > | > > | > > | > | > | > Sponsor | > | > | > | > Links | > | > | ><INDOLOGY/>INDO LOGY/ | > | > | >INDOLOGY | > | > | > | > | > | > | > | > | >Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Messenger | > | > | > | > | > | > Sponsor | > | ><http://rd./SIG=129as6g0h/M=298184.5022502.6152625.3001176/D=group s/S=1705082353:HM/EXP=1086632402/A=2164331/R=0/SIG=11eaelai9/*http://www.net flix.com/Default?mqso=60183351>aaef75.jpg | >aaefe3.jpg | > | > | >---------- | > Links | > * | > * | > <INDOLOGY/>INDOL OGY/ | > | > * | > * | > * | > <INDOLOGY?subject=Un>INDOLOGY-un | > | > * | > * Your use of is subject to the | > <> | | ---------- | | | | | | | | | | Links | | | | | Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 7, 2004 Report Share Posted June 7, 2004 Dear RG, Thanks very much for the clarification. Now I could locate the verse in Ayodhya Kanda (2) sarga 107 shloka 3 as you had indicated. The edition I have is not a South Indian one, but the one published by Pandita Pustakaalaya, Benares. I also got the same version from an electronic edition of VR 99.3 In the 4th and 5th shlokas Rama also brings out the second reason, the story of how Dasaratha had given two boons to Bharatha's mother, which has resulted in Bharatha getting the throne. I do not know how Tilak and others have justified Dasaratha not abiding by the agreement at the time of Kaikeyi's marriage. If you have access to this, I would request you to publish the same. Regards. PKR Robert Goldman <sseas wrote: Dear PKR, The relevant verse is found in the critical edition at VR 2.99.3 which in the Southern text or so called "vulgate" is 2.107.3. There Rama tells Bharata the following; purA bhrAtah pitA naH sa mAtaraM te samudvahan | mAtAmahe samAzrauSId rAjyasulkam anuttamam || In other words, Dasharatha, in order to negotiate the marriage with Kaikeyi promised her father the unequalled bride price of the kingdom ( ie the succession of her son to the throne) the situation is rather similar to the way in which the fisher-king in the Mahabharata extracts a like promise from King Shantanu as a condition for giving the hand of Satyavati. You might also be interested in the way in which some of the commentators on the VR , such as the authors of the Kataka and Tilaka TIkAs seek to justify what appears to have been an case of D. going back on his word by citing zAstras which detail the circumstances under which it is considered permissible for someone to retract his word in cases of marriage. I hope that this helps. Best. RPG Dear RG, I have Valmiki Ramayanam in Sanskrit, I could not locate any portion of Rama telling Bharatha of Dasaratha giving any such promise to his father-in-law Kekaya. I have no access to Pollock's Translation.PKR Robert Goldman <sseas wrote: >Dear PKR, Yes, of course in the Valmiki Ramayana somewhere in the 80-90 sargas of the Ayodhya Kanda (I am writing from the airport and don't have the exact reference handy) Rama tells Bharata a family secret. What he tells him is that at the time that D. negotiated the marriage with Kaikeyi's father, the latter set as a condition for the match that his daughter should be regarded as rAjyazulkA, ie. a girl whose bride price is the succession of the kingdom for her son. Rama uses this information as part of his argument that Bharata should accept the kingship. See Pollock's translation and notes. >In a conversation with Sathya Sai Baba, it is reported that he had said - > >"At the time of Kaikeyi's wedding with Dasaratha, her father, the >king of Kekaya had made known his desire: "O King Dasaratha! You >have contemplated marriage with my daughter, Kaikeyi, in order to >have progeny. Then, it is her son, who should become king, your >successor, shouldn't he? Is this acceptable to you? If your queens >Kausalya or Sumitra give birth to sons, Kaikeyi's son would lose the >right to kingship, wouldn't he?" King Dasaratha listened to this >wish, consulted Kausalya and Sumitra in the matter, apprised them of >the implications, and won their approval." > >Is there any reference to this in any of the Puranas/Ithihasas? > >PKRamakrishnan > > > > > >Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Messenger > > Links > > > > INDOLOGY/ INDOLOGY Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Messenger Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Messenger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.