Week 10 Discussion 1

Week 10 Discussion 1

by Deleted user -
Number of replies: 2

      The crash course got some things right, such as mentioning how Rama is the incarnation of Vishnu, the story was taught orally then eventually written down, and Dasaratha did give his throne to Rama. It also mentions how Manthara did convince Kaikeyi to make Bharata king, Rama is exiled to the Dandaka forest, and a golden deer attracts Sita, causing Rama to go hunt it. Lastly, it also states how Hanuman did visit Sita in captivity and how she did step into fire and was found innocent and loyal to Rama.

      The video glossed over a decent amount of details, such as the reasoning of why Rama is blue, Dasaratha’s intense mourning of Rama, causing him to die, and it didn’t even mention the battle between Vali and Sugriva. Plus, it hardly mentioned the war (which is about 100 pages in the book and Rama’s reunion with his mother and brother, Kausalya and Bharata, is completely glossed over. Also, according to Valmiki’s epilogue, Sita was banished due to gossip. This scene wasn’t mentioned in the video at all.

    The crash course also got things wrong. The host said Rama was in the forest for ten years, but it was fourteen. Additionally, the video said that Laksmana and Rama go hunt for the deer, but actually, Laskmana was with Sita then heard Rama’s fake cries and chases after him, leaving Sita alone.

     I think this video misunderstood the actual importance of this story. It is placed under the subheading of “Mythology” because it isn’t considered real by some, even though many followers consider the story to be true. For outsiders, it appears to be a myth, with the addition of ten-headed characters and monkeys, but for some, it’s truth.  


In reply to Deleted user

Re: Week 10 Discussion 1

by Cole Myers -
A lot of the gloss seems for convenience sake to the writers and speaker, but I assume to the average Hindu, the little details have much bigger implications. Think of trying to truncate the story of Jesus. I think most Christians would take some level of issue with the things they might gloss over. In glossing over the reason for Rama's blue skin, one might in the Christian example gloss over the fact that Jesus is the son of God or why he is crucified. I think that the glosses are due to some cultural ignorance.
In reply to Deleted user

Re: Week 10 Discussion 1

by Deleted user -
I agree a lot with the Mythology aspect because if it was done by someone who practiced Hinduism then it would be labeled as history and not mythology. I think this gives off a bad impression because we should have respect for all religions even if we don't practice them.