[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Re : Rama does eat meat
In article <4e3rfp$gh7@babbage.ece.uc.edu>,
Badarinath Devalla <badari@cs.tamu.edu> wrote:
> Hmmmm, here's what I found in Sri K.R. Srinivasa Iyengar's
> translation of "sundara kAnda". This transaltion is entitled
> "The Epic Beautiful" and here's the 41st sloka of 36th sarga
> Actually, sloka #1523 os sundara kAnda :
> "Rama NOW feeds on neither meat nor fruit,
> and he has no use for honey;
> he lives on austerely cooked roots, eating
> once daily, in the evenings"
(I presume the capitalized NOW is emphasis added and not as it appears
in Iyengar's?)
> One should not use this sloka to decide whether Rama ate meat
> or not. In fact, it is mighty clear that Rama kinda gave up
> meat stricken with the pangs of seperation from his beloved wife.
Is it indeed clear? First of all, it's well known that the Ramayana
was written in Sanskrit, but so far all the posts on this newsgroup
have only provided English translations w/o the Sanskrit
original. Second, you can only say He "gave up meat" if it is already
shown that Rama was eating meat earlier. Since that isn't yet shown,
there is room for a whole host of other interpretations until a
conclusive one is given. For example, Hanuman could just as easily be
reassuring Sita that Rama is still abiding by the principles even
though She is away; that He is not some ordinary man who will go for
an opportunity for sense gratification as soon as a chance arises.
> anyway, hope that helps
> badari
Yours,
Vijay
