Did Sri Rama use Paduka (footwears) during Vanavasa

[shankara]

Pranams to all members of BVP,

Bhagavata 9.11.19 says that Sri Rama's feet were lacerated with thorns of Dandaka forest. So, did Sri Rama stop using Padukas after he gave his padukas to Bharata? Valmiki Ramayana seems silent on this topic. 

I request scholars to kindly clear my doubt.

regards
shankara

[V Subrahmanian]

Dear Shankara ji, 

Just adding this piece of information to the topic you have raised: In a recent discourse by Brahmasri Sundar Kumar on the Valmiki Ramayanam, I had heard this: Sītā, while convincing Rama to take her along to the forest, says:  

yadi tvam prasthitaH durgam vanam adya eva raaghava |
agrataH te gamiShyaami mR^idnantii kusha kaNTakaan || 2-27-6

6. raaghava = Oh; Rama! adyaiva = now itself; tvam prasthitaH yadi = if you set forth; vanam = to the forest; durgam = which is difficult to be travelled; gamishhyaami = I shall proceed; te agrataH = before you; mR^idnantii = by trampling down; dusha kaNTakaan = grass with long pointed stalks and thorns.

"Oh, Rama! If you set forth now itself to the forest, which is difficult to be travelled, I shall come before you, by trampling down thorns and grass with long pointed stalks."

The Bhuṣaṇa of Govindaraja says: फलितार्थमाह--यदीति । अग्रतो गमने हेतुमाह मृद्नन्ती मर्दयन्ती, मृदूकुर्वन्तीत्यर्थ: । कुशरूपकण्टकान् ।। 2.27.6 ।।

warm regards

subrahmanian.v

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/1200007475.204024.1774801056908%40mail.yahoo.com.

[shankara]

Subbuji,

Thank you for sharing this. But, the question regarding Sri Rama wearing paduka during the forest life still remains.

regards
shankara

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAKk0Te2OS%2BMipQvUsW6vOtNECY%3Don0p9h8v%3DOCM%3DfXCKjXuqVg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Sri Rama places his feet on the paadukas and leaves them as per the following description: 

एवम् ब्रुवाणम् भरतः कौसल्या सुतम् अब्रवीत् |
तेजसा आदित्य सम्काशम् प्रतिपच् चन्द्र दर्शनम् || २-११२-२०

अधिरोह आर्य पादाभ्याम् पादुके हेम भूषिते |
एते हि सर्व लोकस्य योग क्षेमम् विधास्यतः || २-११२-२१

सो अधिरुह्य नर व्याघ्रः पादुके ह्य् अवरुह्य च |
प्रायग्च्छत् सुमहा तेजा भरताय महात्मने || २-११२-२२

स पादुके सम्प्रणम्य रामं वचनम्ब्रवीत् |
चतुर्दश हि वर्षाणि जटाचीरधरो ह्यहम् || २-११२-२३
फलमूलाशनो वीर भवेयम् रघुनंदन |

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/479328564.756726.1774843494304%40mail.yahoo.com.

--

Nagaraj Paturi

Hyderabad, Telangana-500044

 

 

 

[Shashi Joshi]

afaik, there is no mention of rAma being barefoot or not after he gave the pAdukA to bharata.

while footwear is mentioned in some other cases (like when rAvaNa disguises to kidnap sItA), in case of rAma, there is no explicit mention either way.

later bhakti literature surely has description that evoke karunA - like lotus-soft feet -- whereas rAma being a kShatrIya, would not have lotus-soft feet.

Thanks,

~ Shashi

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/479328564.756726.1774843494304%40mail.yahoo.com.

[Rajaram Krishnamurthy]

hOPE THIS WOULD CLARIFY AS FROM vEDANTHA DESIKAN:

PADUKA SAHSRAM

SlOkam 115 of SrI RanganAtha PaadhukA Sahasram

 praNayini padhapadhmE gADamAshliShyathi thvAm viDhisuthakaThitham thadh vaIBhavam thE vidhantha: anudhinamruShayasthvAmarchayanthyagnyagArE raGhupathipadharakshE! rAmagiryAshramasThA:

 Meaning: Oh Paaduka! At the time of parting with You, Rama's lotus feet embraced You closely-as a lover would, his love while sending off. Then, sage Vasishta spoke on Your greatness. The other sages living in Chitrakoota started, from then on, to respectfully perform Agnihotra oblations to you, every day, individually. 

 Special Notes from V. Sadagopan:  1) UtthamUr Swami’s anubhavam: Oh PaadhukhE! At Chithrakootam, when you heard about RaamA's decision to give you as a gift to BharathA, RaamA's feet hugged You tightly fearing separation from You for 14 Years. At that time, Sage VaisishtA explained to the assembled group of sages about your eminence and glory. All of the sages listening attentively recognized immediately Your Vaibhavam and placed you at their altars and began to worship you. Swami Desikan implies that the Rishis of ChithrakUtam obtained new PaadhukhAs for RaamA to place His holy feet on them and used those sanctified Paadhukhais for their daily AarAdhanams. The original Paadhukhais accompanied BharathA to AyOdhyA. 

 2) Srimath Andavan’s anubhavam: When a Dharma pathni goes to her parent’s house, then the loving husband hugs her tightly before her journey home and blesses her for safe journey and return to her pukkaham. Swami Desikan points out that Lord RaamA's feet, the YajamAnar of the Paadhukais, hugged them tightly before their journey to AyOdhyA with BharathAzhwAn for similar reasons.

  3) Swami Desikan names ChithrakUtam as Raama Giri. Here RaamA was very happy living with His dear consort in exile. Thus, these hills became very dear to RaamA as well as to SitA Piraatti. Hence Swami Desikan salutes these hills as Raama Giri. Swami Desikan also points out that the Rishis of Raama Giri listened to Sage VasishtA's exposition on the glories of the Raama Paadhukhais and took home new Paadhukhais blessed by contact with the holy feet of their Lord. These Raama Giri Rishis placed the holy paadhukhais at the sanctum, where they performed AgnihOthram daily and worshipped them there with prescribed Vedha manthrams. 

 

  SlOkam 116 of SrI RanganAtha PaadhukA Sahasram

 niyatham aaDhirurOha thvAm anADhEya shakthim nija charaNasarOjE shakthim ADhAthukAma: sa kaTham itharaThA thvAm nyasya rAmO vijahvE druShadh upachitha BhUmoU dhandakAraNya BhAgE

 Meaning: Rama set His feet on You to acquire, for His tender feet, the intrinsic powers You possess; this is certain; if it were not so, how could Rama have walked through the rough rocky Dandaka forest, without wearing You? 

 Sri SRI RANGANATHA PAADHUKA SAHASRAM     85   Special Notes from V. Sadagopan:  1) UtthamUr Swami’s anubhavam: The Rishis of ChithrakUtam obtained new paadhukhAs from RaamA. BharathA took RaamA's original PaadhukhAs in procession to AyOdhyA with all maryAdhais. RaamA did not wear any padhukhAs thereafter during his sanchArams in the forests of DhaNdakaa, since He had given the original PaadhukhAs as a pledge to BharathA to solemnize His return to AyOdhyA at the end of his 14 year's of exile in the forest. RaamA did not therefore want to de-emphasize that pledge through wearing of another set of PaadhukhAs. Lord RaamachandrA's feet were however protected from the thorns and sharp stones of the DhaNdakaa forest by another power. That protection came from the PaadhukhAs embraced His feet, when he stepped on to them at the request of BharathA prior to giving them as His mark of pledge. Part of the inherent and natural power of Paadhukais enveloped the Lord's feet at that time to protect them during His wanderings in the harsh forests of DhaNdakaa. 

 2) Srimath Andavan’s anubhavam: In the 113rd slOkam, Swami Desikan suggested that RaamA imparted power to His paadhukhais to protect BharathA. Here, Swami Desikan reminds us that the Paadhukhais have their own inherent sakthi and that RaamA stepped on them to receive a part of their unlimited power for protection against the harsh environment of DhaNDakA forest. The inner meaning is that the AchAryAs have even greater DayA and patience than the Lord Himself for correcting the Jeevans with innumerable sins and to prepare them for presentation to the Lord, their owner.

   3) Swami Desikan uses the word "anAdhEyam" here, which is the opposite of "AadhEyam", which means to be placed, to be contained. "AnAdhEyam" means svAbhAvikma or naturally powerful without the sambhandham of anything else to empower it. Swami Desikan had wondered earlier (113th slOkam) whether RaamA stepped into the PaadhukhAs to empower them through AadhEyam (placement) of His sacred feet. In this slOkam, Swami Desikan states that the Paadhukhais (AchAryAs) have their own inherent sakthi (anAdhEyam) and therefore were able to share some of that sakthi to protect the Lord's feet, when He roamed the forests of DhaNdakaa without them.

   4) Swami Desikan uses the word "Sakthim" twice in this slOkam: "thvAm anAdhEya sakthim" in the 1st Paadham of this slOkam and "nija charaNa sarOjE Sakthim aadhAthukaama:". 1st sakthi is the anAdhEya Sakthi of the PaadhukhAs; the 2nd sakthi is the derived sakthi from the Paadukais by the lotus-soft feet of the Lord. Swamy hints that the Lord wanted to absorb part of the natural sakthi of the Paadhukhais.       K RAJARAM IRS 30326

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CANu%2BFoCkDVa6tBpKdLzY3mX%2BmuGqvF8v48edpDV-PG9DEecwzg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Shashi Joshi]

as i said, later bhakti literature of course has other descriptions, but vAlmIki rAmAyaNa does not seem to mention either way - barefoot or not barefoot.

Thanks,

~ Shashi

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAL5XZoofH9mQicKnVutq9Reix_GJdGUUj%2BO2t6evTbj979RAmg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Shreevatsa R]

On Sun, 29 Mar 2026 at 09:17, 'shankara' via भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत् <bvpar...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

did Sri Rama stop using Padukas after he gave his padukas to Bharata? Valmiki Ramayana seems silent on this topic. 

Note that the pāduka-s that Bharata received from Rama were ones that presumably Bharata had brought himself, as they are described as हेमभूषिते:

https://sanskritsahitya.org/ramayanam/2.104?scroll=kaavya-2-104-20 (may have to reload the page to 

एवं ब्रुवाणं भरतः कौसल्यासुतमब्रवीत् । तेजसादित्यसंकाशं प्रतिपच्चन्द्रदर्शनम् ॥

अधिरोहार्य पादाभ्यां पादुके हेमभूषिते । एते हि सर्वलोकस्य योगक्षेमं विधास्यतः ॥
सोऽधिरुह्य नरव्याघ्रः पादुके ह्यवरुह्य च । प्रायच्छत्सुमहातेजा भरताय महात्मने ॥

स पादुके ते भरतः प्रतापवान्स्वलंकृते संपरिगृह्य धर्मवित् । प्रदक्षिणं चैव चकार राघवं चकार चैवोत्तमनागमूर्धनि ॥

The explanation I have heard from my elders is that these were pāduka-s that Bharata had brought with him as part of his plan to take Rāma back to Ayodhyā in a grand way, with the pomp that the circumstances would warrant. When Rāma refused to return to Ayodhyā, Bharata requested him to do this instead. So we can infer that Rāma stepped on them knowing what they were being asked for (i.e., especially for the purpose of anugraha / establishing his presence in them); they were not Rāma's daily-use footwear that he incidentally happened to give away to Bharata.

(This doesn't exactly answer the original question asked, merely questions a premise in it. Possibly Rāma was barefoot both before and after the Bharata episode, or possibly he was not and there could be occasional thorns regardless; either way granting Bharata the pāduka-s should have no bearing on the matter.)

[Nagaraj Paturi]

सो अधिरुह्य नर व्याघ्रः पादुके ह्य् अवरुह्य च |  

in २-११२-२२ 

may  indicate that Sri Rama was not using paadukas for walking before or after this Bharata episode. 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CANu%2BFoCb_jRAfxgBW%2BVpSDMtp1cxNDLNnqFS%3D0LhULspsyv97Q%40mail.gmail.com.

[shankara]

Shreevatsa ji,

I too noticed this after posting the query to BVP. A commentator adds that Bharata was acting as per the instruction of Rishi Vasishtha.

अथ मध्यस्थेन उभयोर्हितपरण वसिष्ठेन नियुक्तो भरतः प्रार्थयते--अधिरोहेत्यादिना। अत एव भरद्वाजं प्रति भरतो वसिष्ठोक्तिमनुवदिष्यति--' एते प्रयच्छ संहृष्टः पादुके हेमभूषिते' (11312) इतिगो. अनन्तरसर्गस्य 1112 श्र्लोकौ, टिप्पणी च द्रष्टव्या। (Kataka)

regards
shankara

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAKEM%3DPPKiwYnUkZZbnVJoGb%3D9FdsqRZMtvsiwpiGjtpeU-zNnw%40mail.gmail.com.

[shankara]

Paturi ji,

One may guess so from the quoted verse. Still, Valmiki does not seem to explicitly say whether Sri Rama wore footwears or not during the Vanavasa. I was hoping to get the missing link from some other Purana or other Ramayanas.

regards
shankara

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAJGj9eacFsWG-VMxFdpg%2Bg5Fe3FPqx8qhMtasVQN5h%2BvjROtSg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

राज्ञोच्छ्रितं पदं प्राप्य लब्धकामो ऽपि सत्वरम् ।
वनं यातो मुनिभिर्बटुभिः सभार्यः ॥

Srimad Bhagavatam 9.10.4 

पदं प्राप्य is being taken as barefoot. 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/708437694.309375.1774851286670%40mail.yahoo.com.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

[shankara]

Paturiji,

The commentary Kataka refutes this assumption of Govindaraja and says that the golden padukas were brought from Ayodhya by Sri Rama just as he brought the golden ring from Ayodhya (which was later given to Hanuman). Kataka adds that in Valmiki Rmaayana 2.113.12, Rishi Vasishtha cleary says that these are your padukas - एते प्रयच्छ तव पादुके हेमभूषिते.

regards
shankara

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAJGj9ebwyfi%2BBqM-CSaw2aPGkK4tP63ymR5-H42fvL7Y3J1kEg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Here , https://www.valmikiramayan.net/utf8/kish/sarga44/kishkindha_44_frame.htm,

a special footnote is added regarding the topic of this ring :

Rama's Ring

The ring of Rama assumes a great importance in the course of Ramayana. Though Valmiki says nothing extraordinary, commentators attach many good reasons and attributes to this episode. After the two foots of verse 4-4-12 the following foot is traditionally read, in affection.

suvarNasya su varNasya su-varnasya a~Nguliiyakam

That is to say suvarNasya 'golden ring...' su varNasya 'greatly glittering...' su-varNasya 'good lettered...' 'That ring is golden, that too highly glittering, [rather high in carats, maybe 48 carats,] and has very good letters on it...' That ring has one jewel on upper side and two jewels below that. The upper jewel has a carving of the letter shri and lower two raa, ma... so goes the tradition.

When Rama abdicated everything and no other jewellery is evident on his body, though his bow and arrows have golden finishing, then why this lone ring is still there with him - is the debatable question. This indicates the custom of exchanging rings in marriage. This is the ring got prepared by Seetha in her kingdom Mithila and she herself put it on Rama's finger in their marriage as vara varaNa 'selecting the wooer...' When Hanuma gives this ring to Seetha in Sundara Kanda the reaction of Seetha is: gR^ihiitvaa prekShamaaNaa saa bhartR^i kara vibhuuShaNam | 'on taking the adornment of her husband's hand she looked at it...' at 5-36-4.

This ring to men is almost like the mangala suutra 'the sacred marriage-time pendant of Hindu ladies. Thus, none can ask a man to remove his wedding ring as long as his wife is alive and attached.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/951102575.390877.1774865932810%40mail.yahoo.com.

[P V S Kumar]

यो द्वितीयो वरो देव दत्तः प्रीतेन मे त्वया।।2.11.25।।
तदा दैवासुरे युद्धे तस्य कालोऽयमागत।

नव प़ञ्च च वर्षाणि दण्डकारण्यमाश्रितः।।2.11.26।।
चीराजिनजटाधारी रामो भवतु तापसः।

• ·       As per Kaikeyi’s rule, Rama should spend an ascetic life in the forest.

सर्वाण्येवानुजानामि चीराण्येवाऽनयन्तु मे।।2.37.4।।

खनित्रपिटके चोभे समानयत गच्छतः।
चतुर्दश वने वासं वर्षाणि वसतो मम।।2.37.5।।

अथ चीराणि कैकेयी स्वयमाहृत्य राघवम्।
उवाच परिधत्स्वेति जनौघे निरपत्रपा।।2.37.6।।

स चीरे पुरुषव्याघ्रः कैकेय्या प्रतिगृह्य ते।
सूक्ष्मवस्त्रमवक्षिप्य मुनिवस्त्राण्यवस्त ह।।2.37.7।।

लक्ष्मणश्चापि तत्रैव विहाय वसने शुभे।
तापसाच्छादने चैव जग्राह पितुरग्रतः।।2.37.8।।

• ·       The above verses give information about what all Rama and Lakshmana carried with them to aid them living simple ascetic life for 14 years in the forest.

o   No where in Ramayana it has been mentioned that forest dwelling ascetics wore or can ware footwear for protection of their feet - be it Vishwamitra or any of ascetics like Shatananda, Sharabhanga, Suteekshna, and Agastya in Dandakaranya.

• ·       Bala and Atibala mantras given by Vishwamitra are fully capable of giving protection to the body and mind. When Rama and Lakshmana have these mantras what is the need for ordinary footwear?
• ·       Unstringing the bows they are carrying before meeting the elders has been mentioned; but no mention of removal of footwear before entering hermitages of sages has been mentioned anywhere.

 

P V S Kumar

Sringeri

[abhiram]

Since the Ramayana does not give details of every single personal article of clothing or utensils, we cannot conclude definitively about footwear.

From a Kavyarasa point of view, descriptions of Rama's feet "lacerated" (!) with thorns is meant to evoke the appropriate sentiments. Similarly, Sita offering to walk in front of Rama crushing the thorns and making the path soft for him is also meant to evoke certain tender feelings.

From a realistic point of view, surely the ancients had some form of foot protection while walking in dense jungles. Wounds from repeated cuts on the soles of the feet from thorns which can also be poisonous can easily get infected and cause serious problems. Either "padukas" as platforms made of wood (not very comfortable), or simple coverings made of thick and soft animal skin (very comfortable) would have been used. When we know that skins of deer, tiger, lion, etc. were extensively used as layers for seating or bedding or covering chariots or clothing or for various other uses, it is hard to believe that they wouldn't know to use the same material for foot protection.

Question is, how important is it to know this detail? What about other unmentioned details of Rama's daily routine? Is the Kavyarasa more important or is a factual chronicle more important?

[shankara]

Namaste,

You are right It is most probable that Sri Rama and other would have used some sort of padaraksha. I was in fact hoping to find some mention of this in other versions of Ramayanas like Ananda, Adbhuta, etc. if not in Valmiki Ramayana.

In Skanda Purana 2.7.17, there is a story of a Brahmana (Muni) named Sankha, whose footwear was robbed by a Vyadha. 

regards
shankara

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/77fcea3f-ee7e-4d04-911c-e5b2cd97a7c1n%40googlegroups.com.

[Rajaram Krishnamurthy]

यदि त्वम् प्रस्थितः दुर्गम् वनम् अद्य एव राघव |

अग्रतः ते गमिष्यामि मृद्नन्ती कुश कण्टकान् || २-२७-६

6. raaghava = Oh; Rama! adyaiva = now itself; tvam prasthitaH yadi = if you set forth; vanam = to the forest; durgam = which is difficult to be travelled; gamishhyaami = I shall proceed; te agrataH = before you; mR^idnantii = by trampling down; dusha kaNdakaan = grass with long pointed stalks and thorns.

"Oh, Rama! If you set forth now itself to the forest, which is difficult to be travelled, I shall come before you, by trampling down thorns and grass with long pointed stalks."

लताकण्टकसम्पूर्णाः कृकवाकूपनादिताः |

निरपाश्च सुदुर्गाश्च मार्गा दुःखमतो वनम् || २-२८-१०

10. maargaaH = pathways; lataakaNtaka sampuurNaaH = covered with creeps and thorns; kR^ikavaakuupanaaditaaH = echoed with noise of wild cocks; nirapaaH = water = less; sudurgaaH cha = and very difficult to enter; ataH = hence; vanam = forest; duHkham = is hardship.

"Pathways covered with creepers and thorns, echoed with noise of wild cocks, are water-less and very difficult to enter. Hence dwelling in a forest is hardship."

कुश काश शर इषीका ये च कण्टकिनो द्रुमाः |

तूल अजिन सम स्पर्शा मार्गे मम सह त्वया || २-३०-१२

12. maarge = while in the path; tvayaasaha = with you; kushakaasha shareshhiikaaH = blades of kusha grass; shrubs by the name of Kasa; reeds and rushes; yedrumaaH cha = which plants; kaNtakina = with prickles; tulaajina sama sparshaaH = will touch like heap of cotton or soft deerskin.

"While walking with you, blades of kusha grass, shrubs by the name of kaasa, reeds and rushes and plants with prickles which fall in the path will touch my soles like a heap of cotton or soft deerskin." 

K RAJARAM IRS 19426

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/1654208307.403355.1776590116541%40mail.yahoo.com.

[shankara]

Namaste,

I have heard that Sri Rama's every act was in accordance with Dharmasastra. Sri Rama had made it clear that he will in the forest for 14 years like a Muni. Do the dharmasastras prohibit the forest dwelling sages to wear sandals? If so, Sri Rama would have walked barefoot in the forest. Otherwise, He would have used sandals of some sort.

From the skanda purana reference I had given earlier, it seems that wearing footwear was a norm in those days. 

regards
shankara

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAL5XZopNcuMRx3mOjN-U2biGcNDsrBsni67qcZYVUO7g2D7t0Q%40mail.gmail.com.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Shankara ji,

At this point, you slipped into an approach which is unnuanced so uncharacteristic of you. 

Aren't you aware that Dharma and Dharmashastra are not the same.  You are discerning enough to know that रामो विग्रहवान्‌ धर्मः does not mean Rama followed certain Dharmashastra text(s) true to T. 

You are also aware that Dharmashastra texts do not have code for what to wear, what not to wear etc. for different settlement patterns like village, forest, city, town etc. 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/1736839081.508708.1776659868593%40mail.yahoo.com.

[K S Kannan]

“वर्षातपादिके छत्री दण्डी रात्र्यटवीषु च । 

शरीरत्राणकामो वै सोपानत्कः सदा व्रजेत् ॥” 

इति ज्योतिस्तत्त्वम् ॥ 

अस्या धारणगुणाः । 

“पादप्रधारणं वृष्यमोजस्यं चक्षुषोर्हितम् । 

सुखप्रचारमायुष्यं बल्यं पादरुजापहम् ॥” * ॥ 

अस्या अधारणे दोषा यथा, 

“पादाभ्यामनुपानद्भ्यां नृणां चंक्रमणं सदा । 

अनारोग्यमनायुष्यमिन्द्रियघ्नमदृष्टिकृत् ॥”

 इति राजवल्लभः ॥ * ॥ 

तस्या दानफलं यथा, 

“दह्यमानाय विप्राय यः प्रयच्छत्युपानहौ । 

न तस्य मानसो दाहः कदाचिदपि जायते ॥

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAJGj9eZa18ZBNnMnvBOkTkQE-XZoARL1-e3H0-L7fVZBf2BkQQ%40mail.gmail.com.

--

Dr. K.S.Kannan  D.Litt.

Hon. Prof., Chanakya University, Bangalore.,

Emeritus Prof. and Director, Vishnugupta VishwaVidyapeetham, Gokarna.,

Sant Rajinder Singh Ji Maharaj Chair Professor (Retd.), IIT-Madras.

Member, Advisory Board, "Prof. A K Singh AURO Chair of Indic Studies", AURO University, Surat.
Member, Expert Committee for Review of Criticism of Indian Knowledge Traditions, Central Sanskrit University (under MoE, GoI), Ganganath Jha Campus, Prayagraj.
Adjunct Faculty, Dept of Heritage Science and Technology, IIT Hyderabad.

Nominated Member, Academic Committee, Kavi Kula Guru Kalidasa University, Ramtek.
Member, Academic Council, Veda Vijnana Shodha Samsthana.
Academic Director, Swadeshi Indology.
Nominated Member, IIAS, Shimla.

Former Professor, CAHC, Jain University, Bangalore.

Former Director, Karnataka Samskrit University, Bangalore.

Former Head, Dept. of Sanskrit, The National Colleges, Bangalore.

https://sites.google.com/view/kskannan

[K S Kannan]

यो ददाति द्विजेभ्यस्तु तृतीयायामुपानहौ ।

 वैशाखे शुक्लपक्षे तु सच्छत्रं कनकान्वितम् ॥ 

न तस्य मानषो दाहो मृत्युलोकेऽभिजायते । 

सर्व्वव्याधिविनिर्मुक्तः श्रियं पुत्त्रांश्च विन्दति ॥

- Agnipurāṇa

[K S Kannan]

“ततो ब्रह्मचारी [अनेन मन्त्रेण] चर्म्मपादुकायुगले पादौ निदध्यात् ।” 

- इति भवदेवभट्टः ॥

[K S Kannan]

योगपादुका f. 

a magical shoe (supposed to carry the wearer wherever he wishes), Siṃhās.

[shankara]

Paturi ji,

I wrote in my mail 'I have heard...'. In the book 'Rambles in Ramayana', Swami Jannannada Bharati has described in detail with several examples how Sri Rama's actions were based on Dharmasastras. 

In the Valmiki Ramayana, Sri Rama quotes 2 verses from Manusmriti while answering to Bali. These verses are found in the manusmriti's rajadharma section available to us today.

regards
shankara

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAJGj9eZa18ZBNnMnvBOkTkQE-XZoARL1-e3H0-L7fVZBf2BkQQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[shankara]

Sir,

Thank you for sharing these pramanas. But, these not specific for aanaprasthasrama. Though Sri Rama was not a vanaprasthasrami in the strict sense, he had promised that he will live like a muni.  So, rules pertaining to vanaprasthasrami will be more relevant.

(I am not sure whether all Munis who lived in the forest were vanaprasthis or grihasthas).

regards
shankara

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAN47gm6-BOp_SVaq_hi-Rnzx-J6d9VEFe0F42PghYGBdO3oLmw%40mail.gmail.com.

[P V S Kumar]

The Ramayana is generally considered earlier than the Puranas in both traditional and academic timelines. Hence, the Puranas and other shastras written after the Ramayana period cannot be considered as good sources to get clues whether Rama wore footwear or not. Passions and patterns could have changed since the Ramayana period, to the Mahabharata period, to the Purana period and later. 

We can only look at the Ramayana or its predecessors like the Vedas. IF we find any references of wearing footwear elsewhere in the Ramayana or the Vedas then we need to look for answers to questions like 

• Who (emperors, kings-queens, common people, ascetics, pompous people like Ravana, Rakshas, etc.) 
• When (always, only when attending a meeting with important people, while visiting kings/capital, while spending an ascetic life in the forest, while going for hunting, while going to war, etc.)
• Where (in the place, on the road, in the city, in forests, etc.).

IF we have answers, then we can think of going further in concluding whether Rama wore footwear during Vanavasa.

Regards

P V S Kumar

Sringeri

[P V S Kumar]

यदि त्वम् प्रस्थितः दुर्गम् वनम् अद्य एव राघव |

अग्रतः ते गमिष्यामि मृद्नन्ती कुश कण्टकान् || २-२७-६

This verse doesn't conclusively say that Rama was (wearing or) not wearing any footwear, while Sita got permission from Dasharatha to wear whatever she liked. It also doesn't mean she was wearing thick-heeled boots to walk in the forest so she could crush all the thorns in Rama's path.

No version of Ramayana says that, based on astrological predictions that Sita would spend time in forests, Janaka gave her special footwear to protect her feet. In fact, these words of Sita in verse 2-27-6 were used in a figurative sense only. This can be understood by the various formations they walked into and in the forest.

There were occasions when Sita walked ahead of the brothers, between them and also behind them while traversing the forest.

Formation 1: Lakshmana ahead, Sita in the middle and Rama following them

अथाब्रवीन्महाबाहुः सुमित्रानन्दवर्धनम्।
भव संरक्षणार्थाय सजने विजनेऽपि वा।।2.52.94।।

अवश्यं रक्षणं कार्यमदृष्टे विजने वने।
अग्रतो गच्छ सौमित्रे सीता त्वामनुगच्छतु।।.2.52.95।।

पृष्ठतोऽहं गमिष्यामि त्वां च सीतां च पालयन्।
अन्योन्यस्येह नो रक्षा कर्तव्या पुरुषर्षभ।।2.52.96।।

Formation 2: Sita was walking ahead, while Rama and Lakshmana were engaged in a conversation and following her.

इति तौ पुरुषव्याघ्रौ मन्त्रयित्वा मनस्विनौ।
सीतामेवाग्रतः कृत्वा कालिन्दीं जग्मतुर्नदीम्।।2.55.12।।

Formation 3: Sita and Lakshmana were walking ahead, while Sita was trailing a bit behind Lakshmana. Rama was following them, picking fruits and flowers that Sita liked.

सीतामादाय गच्छत्वमग्रतो भरतानुज।
पृष्ठतोऽहं गमिष्यामि सायुधो द्विपदां वर।।2.55.27।।

यद्यत्फलं प्रार्थयते पुष्पं वा जनकात्मजा।
तत्तत्प्रदद्या वैदेह्या यत्राऽस्या रमते मनः।।2.55.28।।

गच्छतोऽस्तु तयोर्मध्ये बभूव जनकात्मजा।
मातङ्गयोर्मध्यगता शुभा नागवधूरिव।।2.55.29।।

Formation 4: Lakshmana was walking ahead of Rama (as told by Sumantra to Dasharatha)

अग्रतो लक्ष्मणो यातः पालयन्रघुनन्दनम्।
तांस्तथा गच्छतो दृष्ट्वा निवृत्तोऽस्म्यवशस्तदा।।2.59.4।।

Formation 5: Sita was leading, Lakshmana in the middle and Rama was following them.

सीता पुरस्ताद्व्रजतु त्वमेनामभितो व्रज।
अहं पश्चाद्गमिष्यामि गतिर्ह्येषा सुदारुणा।।2.102.21।।

Formation 6: Rama was leading, Sita was in the middle, and Lakshmana was following them.

अग्रतः प्रययौ रामस्सीता मध्ये सुमध्यमा।
पृष्ठतस्तु धनुष्पाणिर्लक्ष्मणोऽनुजगाम ह।।3.11.1।।

P V S Kumar

Sringeri

[K S Kannan]

Sri PVSKumar-ji,

It is easy and nice to expect pramāṇa-s from ancient texts.

One can always say (whether or not as an escapist) 

- Oh well, we haven't got the entire Vedic literature, after all.

Anyway, the ancients did not, and could not have, anticipated every serious/silly question that we can ask today.

A school boy once asked in half jest whether there was a clear indication in the epics 

that Rāma or Kr̥ṣṇa ever urinated. He wanted "at least one evidence".

As long as a statement in a "later" smr̥ti/purāṇa does not get clearly contradicted in the "older" texts,

you can presume them to hold good for the ancient texts also. "Sound" proofs/corroborations/contradictions 

from pertinent fields - say, archaeology, can also have some role to play, of course.

It was over 50 years ago or so, as I roughly recall, that Frits Staal had made a statement:

Go 25 miles into the interiors from any city,

you can still find the India of perhaps the 5th century BC.

Things changed so slowly through not just centuries. (And for that matter, 

the same holds good even in the West, till, perhaps the French Revolution 

and its aftermath.)

Things have of course been changing rather fast in recent times, even in remote villages,

what with the introduction of the TV (and democracy), and now the mobile and the drone.

Traditionally too, the maxims were held generally valid:

anuktam anyato grāhyam, and apratiṣiddham anumatam.

You can fill up the blanks in ancient texts from later ones too,

and you can assume many things - till they are contradicted

by solid evidence or valid logic.

(And for that matter, even history books have their load of 

such presumptions and concoctions, sometimes validated,

and many times contradicted, yet not altered/rectified for long;

or done, if indeed, very grudgingly.)

Where there is a great paucity of facts, we must perhaps exercise greater patience,

and greater restraint, if we wish to get as close to facts as possible.

Finally, I supplied some of the "pramāṇa-s", not not knowing that they were from later texts,

but for showing that some texts, at least, were not silent on the issue.

If you have sound grounds to show that they are ill-founded/impertinent,

you are welcome to present them.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/e3029432-2e24-45fc-a18b-463424d71d4fn%40googlegroups.com.

[K S Kannan]

I notice a small grammatical error in the 1st sentence of the 2nd paragraph,

which pl. excuse.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Shankara ji,

I think you would agree that Rama justified a certain action of him by quoting from a certain Dharmashastra text does not necessarily imply that every action of Rama  was in execution of words from Dharmashastra texts. 

When I was very young, I heard from one of the pravachanakaaras ( kathaavaachaks in north Indian parlance) lecturing on Ramayana with explanations for various actions of Rama from the constitution of India Indian Penal Code and Criminal Procedure Code.

Swami Jannannada Bharati mentions by you seems not to have gone so far in anachronism as that pravachanakaara. He seems to have limited his references to justify Rama's actions only to Dharmashastra texts. 

My view is that we may have to extract principles of Dharma from various vaidika texts including Dharmashastra texts and then through those understand how Rama was an embodiment of Dharma. 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAN47gm4h4XaocByTg_h%2BOrrYS_SoQY--y4aU6_Kfa3_o08ZVyQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[K S Kannan]

I heartily commend the principial approach suggested by Prof. Paturi.

Commentaries like Dharmākūta have tried to show how Rāma's conduct 

remains unsullied even when subjected to rigorous tests spelt out in 

the Dharma-śāstra-s. It should be an interesting study where 

the attempt looks somewhat laboured.

The essentials of dharma abide, though their expression through time and space

can show some variation.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAJGj9eb7gC3phuXoydT661vpX1WUVVG60X%3D5VJ3NwCuvE2G%2BcA%40mail.gmail.com.

[shankara]

Paturi ji,

I fully agree with your views your expressed in the last paragraph. I believe Swami Jnanananda Bharati did exactly the same 

I do not understand why you used the word anachronism. Do you mean that there were no dharmasastras at the time of Sri Rama, or that the Dharmasastra texts that are available to us today are different from them in their content and spirit?

regards
shankara

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAJGj9eb7gC3phuXoydT661vpX1WUVVG60X%3D5VJ3NwCuvE2G%2BcA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

My sentence is 

" Swami Jannannada Bharati mentioned by you seems not to have gone so far in anachronism as that pravachanakaara " 

first point in that is that the pravachanakaara's use of the contemporary laws is anachronistic. ( I think he was doing that only for persuasive tactics with some argument like even as per modern legal/ thinking what Rama did can not be viewed as wrong. )

My observation about Swami Jnanananda Bharati' was only secondary. 

I meant that he was less anachronistic. 

My point is that at least some of the Dharmashastra texts used by him could be chronologically later to Ramayana. 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/379591415.660025.1776695585126%40mail.yahoo.com.

[shankara]

Paturi ji,

I hope you have already read the book by Swami Jnanananda Bharati. If not, please do read it. I would like to see if you would still describe him as 'less anachronistic' after reading the book.

regards
shankara

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAJGj9eYQvXksQvp%3DD1yhjJdkHE7hA9ybY-v5-LJsxp6SZ_Hrgg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

My observation is based on the information shared by you, Shankara ji. 

Let us come back to the original point. 

I will be pleasantly surprised if a Dharmashastra text comes to your help in your search on the topic at hand.  

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/757389346.657652.1776700642731%40mail.yahoo.com.