#sriram

Child marriages did not exist in Ancient India. Vedas, Ithihasas, or Puranas do not mention any child marriage. All women in ancient times married after at least attaining 16 years of age, and most weddings were at Swayamvar.

Susruta, the ancient surgeon of India, wrote in his book ‘Susruta Samhita’ that the marriage age of a girl must be above 16 and for boys must be above 25 years. Many pseudo-scholars wrongly claim that Rama and Sita were kids when married, but Valmiki Ramayana proves them wrong.

Since Vedic era, Upanayana or initiation of education was considered as 2nd birth (Dwija). For Brahmins, it was done at age of 8, Kshatriyas at 11 and Vaishyas at 12. They were called Dwija (twice born) after that. Since both Sita and Rama were from Kshatriya families, both of them were initiated at 11. So after their 2nd birth (initiation), their new ages were 6 and 13 respectively, but their biological ages were 18 and 25 at marriage.

In Aranya Kanda of Valmiki Ramayana, Sita tells Ravana that she had stayed at Ayodhya for 12 years after marriage this is when Ravana appears before Sita in the guise of a saint, she entails the details of her family background.

She mentions that after her marriage with Rama, she stayed in Ayodhya for 12 years.

उषित्वा द्वा दश समाः इक्ष्वाकूणाम् निवेशने |

भुंजाना मानुषान् भोगान् सर्व काम समृद्धिनी || ३-४७-४

𝑑𝑣𝑎𝑎 𝑑𝑎𝑠ℎ𝑎 𝑠𝑎𝑚𝑎𝑎𝐻 means two & ten [twelve] years.

Sita says: "On residing in the residence of Ikshvaku-s in Ayodhya for twelve years, I was in sumptuosity of all cherishes while relishing all humanly prosperities. [3-47-4]”

Janaki also reveals that she was 18 at the time of exile while Rama was 25.

मम भर्ता महातेजा वयसा पंच विंशकः || ३-४७-१०

अष्टा दश हि वर्षाणि मम जन्मनि गण्यते |

"My great-resplendent husband was of twenty-five years of age at that time, and to me eighteen years are reckoned up from my birth. [3-47-10b, 11a]”

Sita also repeats the same to Hanuman in the Sundarkanda, stating that he stayed in Raghava’s house for a period of 12 years.

समा द्वादश तत्र अहम् राघवस्य निवेशने || ५-३३-१७

भुन्जाना मानुषान् भोगान् सर्व काम समृद्धिनी |

"I stayed in Rama's house there for twelve years, enjoying the worldly pleasures belonging to humankind and fulfilling all my desires."

On this basis, a simple conclusion has been drawn by popular Bengali authors like Rajsekhar Basu and Upendranth Mukherjee et al [2]. Both of them (and many others) have suggested in their footnotes that Sita was married to Rama when she was only six years of age.

Many great commentators of the Ramayana from the South have tried to analyse the age of Rama and Sita from the prism of spiritualism.

Nagoji Bhatta, whose famous commentry on Ramayana - “Tilaka” (whose views align with the Advaita school of Sankaracharya) [3] explains:

रावणेन त्विति । आत्मानं जिहीर्षुणा परिव्राजकरूपेण रावणेन पृष्टा वैदेही आत्मना स्वयमेवात्मानं शशंस ।। 3.47.1 ।।

ननु पूजामात्रं कर्तव्यं किं प्रतिवचनेनेत्याह ब्राह्मणश्चेति । एष अनुक्त इत्यार्षो ऽसन्धिः । अनुक्तो ऽनुक्तप्रतिवचनः ।। 3.47.2,3 ।।

सर्वकामसमृद्धिनी । व्रीह्यादित्वादिनिः ।। 3.47.4 ।।

राजमन्त्रिभी राज्ञो राज्यनिर्वाहकैर्मन्त्रिभिरित्यर्थः ।। 3.47.5 ।।

संभ्रियमाणे । संपाद्यमानसंभारे इत्यर्थः । भर्तारं दशरथम् ममार्या मम पूज्या श्वश्रूः । "अनार्या" इति क्वचित्पाठः ।। 3.47.6 ।।

मे श्वशुरं सुकृतेन परिगृह्य वररूपेण सुकृतेन वशीकृत्य । यद्वा धर्मेण शापयित्वेत्यर्थः । मम भर्तुः प्रव्राजनं भरतस्याभिषेचनमिति द्वौ वरावयाचत ।। 3.47.79 ।।

Rama’s age was around 25 years at the time of leaving Ayodhya.

Twenty-five corresponds to the twenty-five principles of the Sankhya system, of which the 25th is seen as 𝐂𝐡𝐚𝐢𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐲𝐚 𝐏𝐮𝐫𝐮𝐬𝐡𝐚 – which is Rama himself or as he is perceived to be.

In the Balakanda, Rama has been presented as an avatar of Vishnu. Being Chaityana Purusha, the whole world is pervaded by his life force, and nothing can transcend it.

In the case of Sita, 18 - represents the five subtle elements, five gross elements, five senses of action, and self, intellect and mind. This implies that Sita is the origin of these and represents Prakriti, the primordial nature of the Sankhya system. [4]

Siromani by Sivasahaya another popular commentary from the South have suggested that Rama was 28 years & not 25 at the time he left for the forest.

In the Balakanda (Sarga 20), King Dasaratha says to Viswamitra:

ऊनषोडशवर्षो मे रामो राजीवलोचनः |

न युद्धयोग्यतामस्य पश्यामि सह राक्षसैः || १-२०-२

"Less than sixteen years of age is my lotus-eyed Rama, and I see no warring aptitude to him with the demons. [1-20-2]”

Here, he probably meant that Rama is just shy of 16, could be anywhere between 15-16.

Now, ‘𝘝𝘢𝘺𝘢𝘴𝘢 𝘗𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘢𝘷𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘢𝘬𝘢𝘩’ – could mean someone whose age is 25+3 =28, if we go by the etymology of the word.

It coincides with Sita's narration. If Rama went with Viswamitra at the age of 15, married Sita the following year, then he should be 28 by the time he left the city.

Sita says she was ‘𝘢𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘥𝘢𝘴𝘢𝘷𝘢𝘳𝘴𝘢𝘯𝘪 𝘨𝘢𝘯𝘺𝘢𝘵𝘦’, so she must be 18 when she left Ayodhya. [5]

In the Ayodhyakanda, Kauslaya says to Rama that she had waited 17 years from his second birth after hearing that his son has been banished to the forest.

दश सप्त च वर्षाणि तव जातस्य राघव |

असितानि प्रकान्क्षन्त्या मया दुह्ख परिक्षयम् || २-२०-४५

Kausalya: "Oh, Rama! I have been waiting for seventeen years after your second birth of thread ceremony, with the hope that my troubles will disappear at one time or the other."

Here the word ‘𝘫𝘢𝘵𝘢𝘴𝘺𝘢’ is an indication of Rama’s age. In [1-20-2], King Dasaratha himself claims Rama was less than sixteen years i.e. fifteen years of age when he accompanied the sage Viswamitra and was eventually married to Sita.

According to Sita’s narration, Rama had spent 12 years of his married life before King Dasaratha decided to install him on the throne as Prince Regent. So, Rama’s age can’t be 17 at the time of exile.

‘Jatsaya’ means ‘born for a second time’. It has been interpreted as the second birth of Rama’s thread ceremony which indicates the investiture with the sacred thread. Going by rules laid down in Smritis, it must have taken place at the age of ten to eleven – “𝑒𝑘𝑎𝑑𝑎𝑠𝑒 𝑣𝑎 𝑟𝑎𝑗𝑎𝑛𝑦𝑎𝑚”. [6]

Thus, Rama must have been 27-28 at the time of leaving Ayodhya.

𝗖𝗿𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗹 𝗘𝗱𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 [𝐂𝐄]

The Critical Edition of The Ramayana has removed the shloka where Sita suggests that she was 18 years of age. Also, they have found inconsistency in the text regarding Sita’s stay in Ayodhya. The Baroda Edition suggests Sita had stayed for just one year in Rama's house after her marriage.

संवत्सरं चाध्युषिता राघवस्य निवेशने |

भुञ्जाना मानुषान्भोगान्सर्वकामसमृद्धिनी || ४||

Aranyakanda, sarga 45, states clearly that Sita stayed for one year only.

Also note, here Sita says – राघवस्य – in the house of Rama – instead of the Ikshashu family (इक्ष्वाकूणाम्), as given in the Vulgate text.

Critical Edition collected 42 manuscripts (MSS) for studying the Aranyakanda, of which they selected only 29 for use (partial or composite). The North Edition consisting of scripts in Bengali, Nepali, Maithili, Sarada, Newari, Devanagari – had 14 MSS. Likewise, Telegu, Grantha, Malayalam and Devanagari made the South Recension, which contributed to 15 MSS for the study of Aranya Kanda.

The manuscripts are not uniform regarding the event of Sita residing for one year in her in-laws' house. All Southern MSS, plus N1 –S1-D1-5 (1 Nepali script, 1 Sarada script, Five Devnagari script) and the Lahore Edition of the Ramayana have the shlokas - उषित्वा द्वा दश समाः (that is 12 years).

Whereas, N2 – V1 – B – D6-7 (2 Nepali, 1 Maithili, 1 Bengali, and Devaganri) have the shloka - संवत्सरं चाध्युषिता (that is one year). It also appears in Gorresio (Bengal) and Calcutta Editions.

Critical Edition has decided to it keep one year, with Aranya Kanda Editor P.C. Diwanji stating – “it very well suits the context.” [7]

Likewise, CE has removed this shloka - अष्टा दश हि वर्षाणि मम जन्मनि गण्यते | - (that is I am 18 years of age) and made it a three-line stanza, somewhat contrary to Valmiki's rhyme.

मम भर्ता महातेजा वयसा पञ्चविंशकः |

रामेति प्रथितो लोके गुणवान्सत्यवाक्षुचिः |

विशालाक्षो महाबाहुः सर्वभूतहिते रतः || १०||

CE has removed this shloka on the basis of transposition.

So, going by CE’s findings, Rama was 25 when he left Ayodhya. Sita (whose age is not mentioned in CE) stayed just one year with Rama after marriage before moving out, which means Rama was 24 at the time of his marriage.

CE also mentions that in Sundarkanda, Sita tells Hanuman – 5-33-17/18 – she spent twelve years in Raghava’s residence, a place that can satisfy all the objects of desire.

Once again, we see the same disparity. All Southern MSS, plus N1 –S1-D1-5 have suggested that she stayed 12 years, and on the 13th year, Rama was supposed to be coronated.

Whereas, N2 – V1 – B – D6-7 claims that Sita stayed for just one year and it also appears in Gorresio (Bengal) and Calcutta Editions. The Lahore Edition of the Ramayana doesn’t mention this shloka at all.

The Critical Edition follows a critical apparatus of filtering text, but on this occasion even they have failed to weed out inconsistencies.

The North East Recension (whom they have based their shlokas for this particular case) says Rama was 25 years of age at the time of coronation, while the North West Recension says he was 27-28.

The Bengal edition doesn’t mention the age of Rama.

General Editor of Baroda, Dr Bhatt claimed that the North West recension contains the oldest MSS and that it is the oldest composite edition – known as the Lahore edition.

Therefore, a natural question arises -- why in this case, despite having an old MSS and a composite edition, CE chose to go with a relatively later MSS on the basis of apparent logic which they felt suits the context?

It differs markedly from Sita’s version at Sundarkand. Why did the editor of the Sundarkand - G.C. Jhala - not go with Sita’s one year stay (her speech to Hanuman) to maintain the consistency?

Jhala writes in the Appendix of the Sundarkand that Sita’s speech to Hanuman has been kept as it is in line with CE’s methodology, but in Arayankanda, when the issue was raised, General editor, Bhatt, went with one year (despite not all evidence backing up) because he felt that was the most logical deduction of the event.

The CE notes in the Appendix – “The reference to 25 or 27 (regarding Rama’s age) seems to be an interpolation or later edition.”

The reason being, CE focuses on Kausalya’s speech to Rama as the focal point – that he was 17 years of age at the time of the coronation. And yet, they completely ignored the word ‘𝘫𝘢𝘵𝘢𝘴𝘺𝘢’.

CE has also kept Dasaratha’s speech to Viswamitra that is Rama was less than 16. So, if Rama gets married at 24, it’s improbable to think that it took eight years for him in the forest to kill Taraka, saving Ahalya and then moving to Mithila.

CE is implying that Rama was 17-18 years of age when he left for the forest (keeping in tune with Kausalya’s words) and negating Sita’s version of 25 years, although they didn’t remove the shloka, only suggesting it could be an interpolation. They didn't consider the concept of 'second birth' - or the Upanayana when it's clearly mentioned in the text.

Camille Bulcke [8] has suggested in Ram Katha (pg 359) that if Sita had stayed for 12 years in Ayodhya that portion was not properly documented, alluding that an avatar of Vishnu leisurely wasting 12 years of his life is unthinkable, and hence that portion is an interpolation.

So, we have to take a holistic approach here.

Going by the Vulgate, Sita was six years of age at the time of her marriage. However, cross-references and analysing the text on the pretext of the Vedic cult defies logic.

The Vedic and post-Vedic literature like the Mahabharata and the Grhyasutras suggest the minimum age of marriage for a girl is ideally 16, or it is better to say when a girl attains her puberty. [9]

King Janaka says to Viswamitra in front of Rama in Balakanda - 𝘷𝘢𝘳𝘥𝘩𝘢𝘮𝘢𝘢𝘯𝘢𝘢𝘮 𝘮𝘢𝘮𝘢 𝘢𝘢𝘵𝘮𝘢𝘫𝘢𝘢𝘮 – that is – my daughter has come of age. [1-66-24]

Also, Janaka recounts that the Kings of Aryavatra tried their luck lifting the bow to win Sita who was a Viryashulka.

ततः संवत्सरे पूर्णे क्षयं यातानि सर्वशः || १-६६-२२

साधनानि मुनिश्रेष्ठ ततोऽहं भृशदुःखितः |

“Then elapsed is a year and in anyway the possessions for livelihood went into a decline, oh, eminent sage, thereby I am highly anguished [1-66-22b, 23a]”

Does that mean, the Kings were fighting to marry a five-year-old girl at that time?

Also, it is interesting to note what Sita says to Rishi-wife Anasuya.

पति सम्योग सुलभम् वयो दृष्ट्वा तु मे पिता |

चिन्ताम् अभ्यगमद् दीनो वित्त नाशाद् इव अधनः || २-११८-३४

Sita says that her father was anxious as she has reached the age of “𝘱𝘢𝘵𝘪 𝘴𝘢𝘮𝘺𝘰𝘨𝘢 𝘴𝘶𝘭𝘢𝘣𝘩𝘢𝘮” – that means where the husband can have a holy union.

सुदीर्घस्य तु कालस्य राघवो अयम् महा द्युतिः |

विश्वामित्रेण सहितो यज्नम् द्रष्टुम् समागतः || २-११८-४४

लक्ष्मणेन सह भ्रात्रा रामः सत्य पराक्रमः |

Sita says that when all the Kings failed to lift the bow, Rama visited Mithila after “a very long time”. These are found in all MSS (no chance of interpolation) and therefore Sita’s statements here hold paramount importance.

The fact that Sita gave Rama a permanent place in her heart (1-76-14) and that the princes enjoyed pleasures in the palaces after marriage logically points to that Sita can’t be six years of age at that time. [10]

So, there can be a multitude of probabilities. Rama can be 16 or 24 at the time of marriage. However, Sita surely has crossed her puberty at the time of marriage, and can’t be six years of age.

Reference:

[1] – Valmiki Ramayana – Hanumanta Rao

[2] – Valmiki Ramayana – Rajsekhar Basu

[2] – Valmiki Ramayana – Upendranatha Mukhopadhyay

[3] Valmiki Ramayana, CE – Volume 1

[4] Valmiki Ramayana with Tilaka commentary

[5] Valmiki Ramayana – IIT

[6] Manu Smriti – Sacred Text (online)

[7] Valmiki Ramayana, CE – Volume 3

[8] Ramkatha – Camille Bulcke

[9] History of Dharmasastra – P.V. Kane

[10] The Riddle of the Ramayana – C.V. Vaidya

°

Focusing on perspective, anatomy and lighting at same time gives me hard time.

°

°

°

The plot follows Somu (Sriram), an affluent NRI who returns from the US for a reunion with his schoolmates in India. When his childhood sweetheart Chandini (Avika Gor) doesn’t turn up, Somu continues his search for her. 10th Class Diaries  

September 25, 2021 

Sriram Raghavan is all ready to team up with Katrina Kaif and Vijay Sethupathi for the first time on the edge of the seat thriller, Merry Christmas. It's being produced by Ramesh Taurani and the makers plan to shoot it extensively at a real location in Pune. However, very few know that Sriram's first choice on this film (much before any producer too came on board) was none other than Salman Khan.

This is the second time that Sriram offered a film to Salman. Back in 2015, right after Bajrangi Bhaijaan, Sriram and Salman had met to discuss a potential collaboration on a thriller, but things didn't work out. For Merry Christmas, they met again as Sriram felt that Salman fit the bill. However, Salman and his team felt that this was too small a film for a superstar like him and politely refused the offer," a source told Bollywood Hungama. 

The source further added, "Salman loves Sriram's work and is equally eager to work with him. However, he wants to do something that's big and on the commercial side. Sriram too wishes to work with Salman once, but he wants to do something that presents him in a different light. Sriram felt that the character in Merry Christmas, though not as larger than life as what Salman Khan was portrayed in his films, had an element of style to it, which justified the presence of Salman."