Kamba Ramayana

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

I thought we can start a separate thread on this topic, since it may be interesting and doesn't quite fit in with the previous thread.

 

First, maybe Karthik can give a short historical explanation of the work. Then we will analyze to what degree it is accepted in traditional circles of vaishnavism.

 

 

[karthik_v 0]

Hari Bol J N Das Prabhuji,

 

Thanks for spinning off this thread. Let me give a brief overview of Kamba Ramayana. Kambar was born into a low caste. His exact date is doubtful, but he lived either just before Sri Ramanuja or right after him. Historically he is dated around 9th or 10th century CE.

 

His Ramayana doesn't vary from Valmiki's in message or ideals. The differences are in nuances. A few come to my mind. In Valmiki's when Ravana abducted Sita, he grabs her and seats her in his lap. Kambar finds this offensive. So, in his Ramayana, Ravana lifts the entire piece of earth on which Sita is standing and flies away in his Vimana. He doesn't even touch her.

 

Another subtle difference is Kambar states that Rama was a great scholar in both Sanskrit and Tamil. In fact, he even states that Valmiki was one of the great scholars in the first Tamil Sangam. This is not found in Valmiki Ramayana.

 

Kambar mentions about Hiranyakashipu's slaying, which is not there in Valmiki Ramayana. Otherwise, there is hardly any difference between Valmiki Ramayana and Kamba Ramayana. In fact, one can argue that Kamba Ramayana is a more faithful reproduction as there are no conflicting recenssions. It doesn't even contain the nonsensical Uttara Kanda, which of course, the original Valmiki Ramayana didn't contain either. But, Valmiki Ramayana has been mercilessly interpolated and the verses vary anywhere between 24000 and 48000. The most common recenssion of Valmiki Ramayana is the eastern recenssion from the Gaudiya desh. May be that explains why the sensuous verses from Valmiki Ramayana have been removed over the past few centuries.

 

Interestingly, in Tamil, way before Kamba Ramayanam, 3 other Ramayanams existed. One of them has survived in parts. It is called Pazhaiya Ramayanam. It contains erotic verses as well. I cannot believe that Kambar would have written those erotic verses, if they didn't exist in Valmiki Ramayanam. In any case, Andal's songs are full of erotic verses. She is also revered by Sri Vaishnavas. This again shows that in ancient Tamilnadu (before 10th century CE), eroticism was never abhorred. That is why I consider Kambar's renderings natural.

 

As I told, Kamba Ramayanam is recited in all Sri Vaishnava temples. Recitation of his Sundara Kanda is considered very auspicious. This Kanda too contains very sensuous verses where Rama pines in memory of Sita and recollects the passionate moments He shared with her in the Aranyakas.

[Avinash 0]

In Valmiki's when Ravana abducted Sita, he grabs her and seats her in his lap. Kambar finds this offensive. So, in his Ramayana, Ravana lifts the entire piece of earth on which Sita is standing and flies away in his Vimana. He doesn't even touch her.

 

Don't you think that a fact is a fact even if it is offensive?

 

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

What position does Kamba take on the "maya-sita" found in some Puranas (i.e. that Sita was never kidnapped by Ravana, but an illusory sita was manifested by Agni Deva, and that was taken)?

[Avinash 0]

Tulsidas's Ramacaritmanas also holds the position that an illusory Sita was kidnapped by Ravana.

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

And one other question. Where does Vedanta Deshika quote from Kamba Ramayana, and to what extent?

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

The story of the maya-sita is found in several Puranas (no sources on hand at the moment, but just from memory).

 

I would be interested to see whether someone of the devotional status as Vedanta Deshika had quoted from it, as that would give some credibility to it among other vaishnava schools. As far as Madhva, it is well known that he rejected all Ramayana's of his time, which would have included Kambar's (which certainly would have been well known throughout South). Madhva was of the view that only mula-ramayana (which some, such as Gaudiya's, identify as Valmiki Ramayana) is authentic.

 

What is the background of Kambar? I am aware he was born in a family of Narasimha devotees, but personally what was his own "line". Has he composed books on other deities, such as Shiva, etc.?

 

[This message has been edited by jndas (edited 05-10-2002).]

[karthik_v 0]

Originally posted by jndas:

The story of the maya-sita is found in several Puranas (no sources on hand at the moment, but just from memory).

 

I would be interested to see whether someone of the devotional status as Vedanta Deshika had quoted from it, as that would give some credibility to it among other vaishnava schools. As far as Madhva, it is well known that he rejected all Ramayana's of his time, which would have included Kambar's (which certainly would have been well known throughout South). Madhva was of the view that only mula-ramayana (which some, such as Gaudiya's, identify as Valmiki Ramayana) is authentic.

 

What is the background of Kambar? I am aware he was born in a family of Narasimha devotees, but personally what was his own "line". Has he composed books on other deities, such as Shiva, etc.?

 

[This message has been edited by jndas (edited 05-10-2002).]

I have sent a mail to an erudite Sri Vaishnava devotee asking for information on whether great acaryas like Manavala Mamuni or Vedanta Desikar have quoted Kambar and the references. When he responds, I will share that information with you all.

 

I just recalled that another Sri Vaishnava writer by the name Mukkur Narasimhacharyar has also written a lot on the importance of Kambar's Ramayana in Sri Vaishnava tradition. Further, Kamba Ramayana is recited regularly in all Sri Vaishnava temples. So, on that basis I would say it is authentic. Anyway, let me get the input from that scholarly devotee, as he is very thorough in Tamil devotional works.

 

Not much is known about Kambar. all we know is that he was born into a low caste. This is known because of his own verse, when confronted by Brahmins for mentioning Hiranyakasipu. He has not written on anyone else other than Rama. He has not written any other book either to the best of my knowledge. Not much is known about his lineage or what sampradaya he followed. Since he was a Vaishnava poet and since only Sri Vaishnavism existed then, I would think that he followed Sri Vaishnava sampradaya. It is worth noting that in those days, Sri Vaishnavism included not only Brahmins but also other lower castes. In fact, 10 out 0f 12 Azhwars were lower caste people, often Harijans.

 

[sha 0]

Originally posted by Avinash:

Tulsidas's Ramacaritmanas also holds the position that an illusory Sita was kidnapped by Ravana.

Copied from another board:

 

Here are some beautiful verses and wonderful information from 'Sri Rama Carita Manasa' by Saint Sri Tulasidasji.

 

The meaning of the title being - 'The Holy Lake of The Blissful Exploits of Lord Rama', the Swan like devotees can sport and enjoy the Divine Nectar.

 

It was written by Saint Sri Tulasi dasa that Sri Rama asked Mother Sita to stay with the Fire God as the Demon Ravana was planning to kidnap Her.

 

Sita Devi followed Lord's wish and ONLY the Mirror IMAGE of Sita was left behind and remained during the further continued Lilas of Sri Rama, as the golden deer hunting and Ravana's abduction of Sita Devi.

 

Even Brother Lakshmana DID NOT know this as he was not present when Mother Sita left into Fire God.

 

Aranya Kanda, doha.23-

 

" When Lakshmana had gone into the woods to gather roots, fruits and bulbs, Rama, the very incarnation of joy and compassion, spoke with a smile to Janaka's daughter (Sita):

 

'Listen, beloved wife, beaitiful, faithful and amiable; I am about to act an alluring human part; let fire then be your dwelling-place till I have completed the extirpation of the demons.'

 

No sooner had Rama finished speaking than She impressed the image of the Lord's feet on Her heart and entered into fire, leaving only Her IMAGE there, exactly the same appearance and same amiable and modest disposition.

 

Not even Lakshmana knew the secret of what the Lord had done."

 

At the end of the war, Sita Devi had returned back to Lord Ramacandra when the Image Sita entered the Fire Sacrifice.

 

This information was also given by Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu to the loving devotee of Sri Rama, on His South Indian tour. (C.C)

 

'raama lakshmana jaanaki,

jaya bolo hanumaana ki !'

<font color=#cccccc>

 

[This message has been edited by sha (edited 05-10-2002).]

[karthik_v 0]

Originally posted by Avinash:

Don't you think that a fact is a fact even if it is offensive?

It is. I mentioned that to show that Kambar's version varies only in nuances.

 

Originally posted by J N Das:

What position does Kamba take on the "maya-sita" found in some Puranas (i.e. that Sita was never kidnapped by Ravana, but an illusory sita was manifested by Agni Deva, and that was taken)?

This doesn't find a mention in Kamba Ramayana. If I remember correctly, this is not found in Valmiki's either. I think, this was first told by Madhvacarya. Both Valmiki and Kambar preceded Madhvacarya.

 

Originally posted by J N Das:

And one other question. Where does Vedanta Deshika quote from Kamba Ramayana, and to what extent?

I need to check on that. I am not sure whether it is Vedanta Desikar or Manavala Mamuni who quoted from Kambar. I read that on Bhakti List in a post by a very knowledgeable Sri Vaishnava. I will try to get the exact information.

[karthik_v 0]

Not directly related, but I thought the readers may find the views of this Sri Vaishnava acarya interesting [produced from Bhakti list]:

 

I will quote now verbatim from AgnihOthram Sri RaamAnuja TatachAr's monograph on the Eternal relevance of VedAs dealing with the role of women in Hindu Society :

 

In the early years of marriage , love has a sexual importance. But with the advance of years, it mellows into a great attachment and affection. No one can disturb this mutual love. Marriage is not made for sexual purpose , BUT FOR A REAL UNITED LIFE ....

 

The VedAs say that the wife is the only friend of her husband....Their comradeship is strengthened by day-to-day movements .She never claims superiority over her husband and she is never treated as inferior by her husband.She is the mistress of the house ....

She is a real friend and closely follows her husband in the good and bad of domestic life and takes keen interest in his welfare.She also advises him at times. Smruthi following the direction given by the Vedas states clearly that it is the duty of a wife to correct the mistake of her husband " .SitA piraatti did just that in a famous pasage in Srimadh RaamAyaNam in Her conversation with HanumAn in AsOka Vanam.

 

AgnihOthram TatachAr swamy points out a special Vedic term : Purandhi and explains its significance . According to the VedAs , women are more intelligent

than men (i.e) she is a purandhi.In AsvanEdhA , there is a prayer that women must be " purandhi". By that term , Women's superior intelligence is indicated. " According to the VedAs , Woman is a karma yogi . She does duty for duty's sake.She sacrifices her individual pleasure and pain and serves the family . The early life of all children depend on the care of the mother. She brings them up as intelligent

and pious ones . The stability of her integrity is brought out in one MantrA , which points out that women are to be strong as a rock in the family so that the family can survive . Her integrity not only keeps the family in a high order , but it overcomes all enemies as well ".She is the queen of her husband's house .She maintains the customs and traditions of the house strictly , with vigilance .The house may be built by bricks and wood , but it is not the real house.In fact , the wife is only the real house. VedAs never confine a woman to

the house.Many brilliant women have reached out with their husbands and attained a spiritual status equal to or higher than that of their husbands , who are revered as Manthra dhrushtAs of the various Veda Manthrams .

 

The names of the women Rishis (RishikAs or Lady seers ) are etched in the annals of the Veda manthrams .None of the Rishis or the Rishi pathnis are recognized as the composers of the Veda manthrAs , but as samhithAkarthAs , who assisted in the collection of the Veda manthrams thru the power to "see " them as manthra dhrushtAs .

Angirasa , Gautama , VasishtA , ViswAmithrA , Bhrugu , Athri , Marici , KasyapA , AgasthyA and BharadhvAjaa belong to the rich set of Rishis in this category .

Every Veda manthram has a Rishi or RishikA , Chandas and DevathA . We invoke them prior to the recitaion of the individual mathrAs of the different VedAs . Each of these Rishis have a distinguished wife well versed in scholarship , AchAram and anushtAnam . These rishikAs or Lady Seers took an important part in SamaadhikaraNam . YajnavalkyA's wife and her tight questioning of her husband gave birth to a great Upanishad . There are abundant reference to the RishikAs in the Tenth Canto of Rg Vedam besides the other Cantos .

 

LopamudhrA is one such RishikA as the wife of AgasthyA , known for his command over Sanskrit and Tamil. The meaning of the word "LopamudhrA " is one , who is totaly absorbed in herself (i-e)., she is one of the BrahmavAdhini RshikAs.Two manthrAs of

the Rg Vedam ( Canto I.179.1-2) are attributed to her .

 

RoamasA the wife of SvanyA , VisvavArA belonging to the Athri family , AangirasI Sarasvathi of Angirasa family , ApAlA of the Athri family , YamI Vaivasvathi , SraddhA , Vasukra pathni , GhOshA , SooryA , IndrANi , Urvasi , Sarama , Joohu , VagAmbhruNi and PoulOmi Sachi are well known RshikAs , who are revered and are associated with individual Rg Veda ManthrAs .

 

In the concluding posting , I will describe selected Rg Veda manthrAs linked to the individual RishikAs to illustrate the importance of Vedic Women , who are

models for us even today . The women in many

Indian households along the length and breadth of Bharatha Varsham have imbibed these rich and resonant values in their bone and blood and keep their family strong and righteous .

 

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

The women in many Indian households along the length and breadth of Bharatha Varsham have imbibed these rich and resonant values in their bone and blood and keep their family strong and righteous.

Unfortunately today they seem to be imbibing the Hindi TV serials on Star Plus more than anything from the Rig Veda.

 

[Guest guest]

Is there an online Kamba Ramayana?

[Guest guest]

 

In fact, one can argue that Kamba Ramayana is a more faithful reproduction as there are no conflicting recenssions.

 

 

 

I didn't find the above statement to be very logical. Obviously, the Kamba Raamaayana is less likely to have multiple, conflicting recensions, since it is much later to the original Vaalmiiki Raamaayana. I don't see how that makes it more correct than the version of Vaalmiiki. Possibly, if Kamban was following a recension of the Raamaayana that was close to the original, then it could be said that Kamban's version is more faithful to the original than certain recensions of the Vaalmiiki Raamaayana.

 

Furthermore:

 

 

Another subtle difference is Kambar states that Rama was a great scholar in both Sanskrit and Tamil. In fact, he even states that Valmiki was one of the great scholars in the first Tamil Sangam. This is not found in Valmiki Ramayana.

 

 

 

I suppose anything is possible. The Lord knows everything, so why not Tamil? But for Vaalmiiki to know Tamil 2 million years ago? Objectively speaking, scholars might consider the above to be interjected by those with a regional or sectarian bias. Not that it is troublesome for most Vaishnavas; but if one is going to suggest that Kamban's work is definitive while Vaalmiiki's should occupy a secondary place, it is certainly begging the question.

 

 

It doesn't even contain the nonsensical Uttara Kanda, which of course, the original Valmiki Ramayana didn't contain either.

 

 

 

Many times I hear the above spoken with great confidence, but rarely do I read or hear of the evidence being presented as to why Uttara Khanda cannot be from the original Raamaayana. For that matter, I don't even know what the Gaudiiya position is on this. I would like to know definitely what evidence there is to suggest that Uttara Khanda is interpolated - preferably something more than "we don't like it, therefore it has to be interpolated."

 

Mind you, I am not defending the Uttara-khanda's inclusion or rejecting it. I just feel we need a more objective view of its status.

 

 

But, Valmiki Ramayana has been mercilessly interpolated and the verses vary anywhere between 24000 and 48000.

 

 

 

These differences in length certainly suggest that some versions are interpolated. But that does not prove that the Uttara-khanda is the section that is interpolated.

 

 

The most common recenssion of Valmiki Ramayana is the eastern recenssion from the Gaudiya desh. May be that explains why the sensuous verses from Valmiki Ramayana have been removed over the past few centuries.

 

 

 

 

This is news to me. Raamaayana scholarship is the Gaudiiya line has never been its forte - one wonders why the most common recension would come from that region.

 

yours,

 

- K