Was Dashrath having more than 350 wives?

[Ashish Sharma]

Dear Learned Scholars and Guruvars
Pranaam


A small query raised while reading Valmiki Ramayan.
In Ayodhyakand, 34th Sarga, there is a shloka which says-

सुमन्त्र आनय मे दारान् ये केचित् इह मामकाः |
दारैः परिवृतः सर्वैः द्रष्टुम् इच्चामि राघवम् ||

"Oh, Sumantra! being all my wives, who are here. Surrounded by all of them, I want to see the virtuous Rama."

Later on, another shloka states:

एवम् उक्ताः स्त्रियः सर्वाः सुमन्त्रेण नृप आज्ञया |
प्रचक्रमुस् तत् भवनम् भर्तुर् आज्ञाय शासनम् ||

All those women, asked thus by Sumantra as per the king's orders, went to his palace, after knowing the instructions of their husband.

अर्ध सप्त शताः ताः तु प्रमदाः ताम्र लोचनाः |
कौसल्याम् परिवार्य अथ शनैः जग्मुर् धृत व्रताः ||

Encircling Kausalya, three hundred fifty women, steadfast in their vow(of devotion to their husband), with their eyes reddened, went there slowly.

So does it mean that King Dashratha was having more than 350 wives? Or was 350 women were not wives but just caretaker of queens and came along with Kaushalya? If they were caretaker then why they came as Dashrath ordered to bring wives only?


Please guide me for the same.


Regards



Ashish Sharma

Decrypting of Astrological Texts
OSD to President and Assistant Controller of Examination of Indian Council of Astrological Sciences(ICAS)

[Hnbhat B.R.]

The offhand answer is that he was having 60000 wives and not only 350. But only 350 came when he called who were present in Ayodhya as per the reference given. For a discussion on this question see this:

https://in.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110420092337AAemntQ

The commentators didn't bother about the number given by Valmiki.

--
निराशीर्निर्ममो भूत्वा युध्यस्व विगतज्वरः।। (भ.गी.)
---
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 post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bvparishat.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Vidwan Ashish was specifically focussing on Valmiki Ramayana.

 

The link provided by Dr. Bhat gives the figure 60000 as from Kamba Ramayana.

 

दारैः परिवृतः सर्वैः द्रष्टुम् इच्छामि राघवम् ||

 

राघवम् सर्वैः दारैः परिवृतः द्रष्टुम् इच्छामि

 

This shows that the summoned were the total number of wives.

 

350 wives, thousands of years of life span, years long pregnancies are all to be taken in the same spirit.

 

The focus in Ramayana is Rama and his ekapatneevrata.

 

 

 

 

 

--

Prof.Nagaraj Paturi

Hyderabad-500044

[Bijoy Misra]

Friends,
Reading of Valmiki would indicate that the royals in the early society did

maintain an "antahpura" of women who acted as King's consorts.  The book

does not say about their rights or privileges.  Most likely they were not

wedded wives.  Valmiki uses a word "dayitA" for his "wives" from whom

he expects a son.  So, after his "putreSTi yajna" he shares the pAyasam

with only three.  The book has to be read in context.  The words the

poet uses have only contextual use in the Chapters.

Three fifty "striyaH" do appear all together at various occasions:

Rama going to forest, Dasaratha dying, the party going to meet Rama in

the forest.  It seems they flank Kaushlya in her movement.

I just finished reading AyodhyAkanDa.  I will write later in case

further reference shows up.

BM

Boston

[Radhakrishnan C S]

Dear Sir,

Besides the reason that the kings in those days had many wives through which they also established friendly relations with other countries or kingdoms, it was more essential for Dasaratha. In fact he was , perhaps, the only Kshatriya who escaped the axe of Parasurama. Parasurama would not kill any Kshatriyas who has tied the wrist band as preparation for marriage. So every time, there is threat of Parasurama coming to Ayodhya, Dasaratha would immediately embark on a new wedlock. That is one of the reasons for having many wives.

Radhakrishnan

[Bijoy Misra]

Dear Dr Radhakrishnan,

This story is not in Valmiki's Ramayana. Dasaratha is aware of ParshurAma

and is dead scared when the latter blocks them while they were returning from Mithila.

But Valmiki says nothing about the origin of these other wives in Dasaratha's
palace.  However, they do become "widows" upon Dasaratha's death.

Best regards,

BM

[Suresh Srinivasamurthy]

Dear Scholars, Namaste,

 

Dr.K.S.Narayanacharya who is a reputed scholar in Ramayana and Mahabharata, in one of his lectures says that Dasaratha used to marry / accept a new wife every time he heard from his spies that Parasurama is in the area looking to eliminate Kshatriyas. It is said that Sri Parasurama used to go away without killing, if the Kshatriya king was in the middle of getting married.

 

Namaste

Suresh

[Hnbhat B.R.]

On Sat, Mar 7, 2015 at 10:36 PM, Suresh Srinivasamurthy <sure...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Scholars, Namaste,

 

Dr.K.S.Narayanacharya who is a reputed scholar in Ramayana and Mahabharata, in one of his lectures says that Dasaratha used to marry / accept a new wife every time he heard from his spies that Parasurama is in the area looking to eliminate Kshatriyas. It is said that Sri Parasurama used to go away without killing, if the Kshatriya king was in the middle of getting married.

 

This story was mentioned already, and it was replied that it is not found in Ramayana. Please read the replies carefully and please give reference to Ramayana if any in support of this story, where this story is mentioned. 

[Hnbhat B.R.]

This story was mentioned already, and it was replied that it is not found in Ramayana. Please read the replies carefully and please give reference to Ramayana if any in support of this story, where this story is mentioned. 

Please read the underlined as Ramayana of Valmiki and not any of the miscelaneous Ramayana-s spread after Valmiki.

[Savitri malladi]

Namaskarams

Dasharatha indicates dasa indriyas of our body which are under his control forever.  350 may indicates days of an year which had total good administration which laid way to Rama rajyam is my view.

Authentic opinion can be attained by Branmasri Chaganti Koteswara Rao, who is having expertise in Ramayanam.
Hope this might have a way .......

Warm regards

--

[Ajit Gargeshwari]

I don't know if Branmasri Chaganti Koteswara Rao is a member of this group if he is he may reply if he is not All who replied are experts too

Regards
Ajit Gargeshwari
न जायते म्रियते वा कदाचिन्नायं भूत्वा भविता वा न भूयः।
अजो नित्यः शाश्वतोऽयं पुराणो न हन्यते हन्यमाने शरीरे।।2.20।।

[Bijoy Misra]

Dear Ms Savitri,

Read the text and discover yourself.  Please learn by discovery and not by hearing.

Thank you.

BM

[Hnbhat B.R.]

On Sun, Mar 8, 2015 at 11:20 AM, 'Savitri malladi' via भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत् <bvpar...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

Namaskarams

Dasharatha indicates dasa indriyas of our body which are under his control forever.  350 may indicates days of an year which had total good administration which laid way to Rama rajyam is my view.

Anybody can express view anything a number denotes.

But in the verse quoted in the context, it expressly states it refers to the numbers of ladies (if not wives) accompanying Kausalya. That much is certain from the line. 

सुमंन्त्रानय मे दारान् ये केचिदिह मामकाः।

दारैः परिवृतस्सर्वैर्द्रष्टुमिच्छामि धार्मिकम्।।2.34.10।।

=

सुमन्त्र: Sumantra, मामकाः all my (consorts), ये केचित् whosoever, इह are here, मे दारान् my wives, आनय bring them, सर्वैः by all, दारैः with wives, परिवृतः surrounded by, धार्मिकम् virtuous Rama, द्रष्टुम् to see, इच्छामि I want.

The above is the order of Dasaratha.

This is how he describes the event of the queens folowing his request brought by Sumantra:

अर्धसप्तशतास्तास्तु प्रमदास्ताम्रलोचनाः।

कौसल्यां परिवार्याथ शनैर्जग्मुर्धृतव्रताः।।2.34.13।।

अथ thereafter, धृतव्रताः faithful to their vows, ताम्रलोचनाः women with copperred eyes, ताः those, अर्धसप्तशताः half of seven hundred (three hundred and fifty), प्रमदाः women, कौशल्याम् to Kausalya, परिवार्य surrounding, शनैः slowly, जग्मुः reached. 

This is the commentary तत्त्वदीपिका ---

अर्द्धेति । अर्धसप्तशताः अर्धं सप्तशतस्येत्येकदेशसमासः । पञ्चाशदधिकशातत्रयसङ्खयासङ्ख्येयेत्यर्थः । ताम्रलोचनाः, रामवियोगदुःखात् ।। 2.34.13 ।।

And he doesn't give any Tattva in the above number. The number of 350 is not given directly, but as half of 700 = 350. 3 stands for three worlds, and other things. 5 stands for Indriya's. and प्राण-s. 0 stands for आकाश, 0r खम्. and so on one can invent तत्त्व-s.

 

Authentic opinion can be attained by Branmasri Chaganti Koteswara Rao, who is having expertise in Ramayanam.
Hope this might have a way .......

Warm regards

Now you can wait for the explanation of Koteswara Rao, if he is a member of this forum.

 

[sunil bhattacharjya]

Dear friends,

This explanation that Dasharatha had to marry every time Parashurama was around, does not appear to be convincing. However, there is a Pauranic injunction that a man cannot be given the death-penalty, if his wife is having ऋतुकाल, (i.e., the man cannot be killed until the ऋतुरक्षा is over). I read it long ago in a Purana, though I do not remember the reference at this time. May be, some of our Purana-scholars will remember this. Thus having many wives could probably ensure the safety of Dasharatha. There could be other reasons too, such as Dasharatha had to marry many women to get children but he did not get any till he performed the Putresti Yajna.

Regards,

Sunil KB

ऋतुरक्षा

--

[Ashish Sharma]

Dear Bijoy Misra and Guruvars

Pranaam

Will you please give other shlokas with references where Valmiki had mentioned 350 wives?

Regards

Ashish Sharma

Decrypting of Astrological Texts
OSD to President and Assistant Controller of Examination of Indian Council of Astrological Sciences(ICAS)

www.icasindia.org

[Bijoy Misra]

Dear friend,

I have said what I know.

Please research the rest if you are not convinced.

Thank you.

BM

[Ashish Sharma]

Dear Bijoy Ji

I believe you therefore asked you the shlokas with exact location as it will help me to locate it and understand it better.

Moreover, have you found any other references after Ayodhyakand as you were about to read other kands?

Thanks in advance.

Ashish Sharma

Decrypting of Astrological Texts
OSD to President and Assistant Controller of Examination of Indian Council of Astrological Sciences(ICAS)

www.icasindia.org

[Bijoy Misra]

I have gone only upto ayodhya.

i will write if I encounter later.

Mine is a four year translation project.

[Bijoy Misra]

In case anyone has read and thought about the text, there are more interesting

contextual questions.  Has any one thought what the character Viradha mght be?

Possibly many more such characters would appear as they proceed in Dandaka.

[sunil bhattacharjya]

Dear friends,

The 65th and 66th Chapters of the Ayodhyakanda are related to the death of Dasharatha. There is the wailing of the widowed wives, but no mention of the figure of 350 wives in these chapters.

It is quite possible that Dasharatha married as many as 350 other women for begetting son as his three main wives could not bear any son till Lord Ram was born, although Dasharatha had one daughter born earlier to Kaushalya.

Regards,

Sunil KB

[Hnbhat B.R.]

On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 11:45 PM, Ashish Sharma <cools...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Bijoy Misra and Guruvars

Pranaam

Will you please give other shlokas with references where Valmiki had mentioned 350 wives?

Here is another mention later of 350 wives as:

 एतावदभिनीतार्थमुक्त्वा स जननीं वचः।

त्रयश्शतशतार्धाश्च ददर्शावेक्ष्य मातरः।।2.39.36।।

where  all the 350 ladies are called as mothers, while he spoke the consoling words to कौसल्या only. in next verse also they are referred to as mothers to whom he bids farewel in the next verses:

ताश्चापि स तथैवार्ता मातृ़र्दशरथात्मजः।

धर्मयुक्तमिदं वाक्यं निजगाद कृताञ्जलिः।।2.39.37।।

whether दशरथ married all of them or not, question raised by Bijoy Mishra. All were referred to as mothers by Valmiki and also as wives of दशरथ. I think in this 350 wives, कैकेयी might not be आर्ता, if she had accompanied along with others. 

 

[Bijoy Misra]

Dear Dr Bhat and friends,
माता as a word is used by Valmiki in various contexts connecting women in
Rama's life.  It is fascinating to interpret culture from the use of words.  My
thinking has been that most interpretations with object identifications are
incorrect. I am only a new entry to the vast field of literature.  I offer this
comment with utter humility but with an objective view.

Best regards,

BM

--

[Hnbhat B.R.]

Very fine. NO argument with your comments, but I BELieve the commentators were more familiar with our culture and vast literature than me.  That is why I am depend on them. 

[Bijoy Misra]

Dear Dr Bhat,
It is the English translations that I am concerned.  I have not searched the

commentaries in Sanskrit or other languages.  My effort is to interpret

from the first principles as much I can.  I love Valmiki's use of words and

also the notice the social use in our homes!

Best regards,

BM

On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 6:45 AM, Hnbhat B.R. <hnbh...@gmail.com> wrote:

Very fine. NO argument with your comments, but I BELieve the commentators were more familiar with our culture and vast literature than me.  That is why I am depend on them. 

--

[Nityanand Misra]

On Friday, March 6, 2015 at 11:15:49 PM UTC+5:30, Ashish Sharma wrote:

Dear Learned Scholars and Guruvars
Pranaam

Please see attached pages from Rāmayaṇa Mīmāṃsā which cover this topic extensively with all references. As per Dharmasamrāṭ Karapātra Svāmī, only the accounts of Vālmīki Rāmayaṇa (700), Adhyātma Rāmayaṇa (700) and Ānanda Rāmāyaṇa (353) are reliable while other later accounts are not, and the difference can be accounted for by Kalpabheda.

 

[Sampath Kumar]

Dear friends

 i studied 4 commentaries

1-Ramanujeeya

2-Govinda raajeeya

3-Thilaka

4-Tattva Deepika of Maheswara teertha, all are agreed those 350 are wives only

goodluck

Sampath Kumar Medavarapu     ​

 

​             

​

[Nityanand Misra]

On Wednesday, March 11, 2015 at 7:12:22 PM UTC+5:30, Nityanand Misra wrote:

Please see attached pages from Rāmayaṇa Mīmāṃsā which cover this topic extensively with all references. As per Dharmasamrāṭ Karapātra Svāmī, only the accounts of Vālmīki Rāmayaṇa (700), Adhyātma Rāmayaṇa (700) and Ānanda Rāmāyaṇa (353) are reliable while other later accounts are not, and the difference can be accounted for by Kalpabheda.

Apologies for mixing up the numbers in my post. That should read

Vālmīki Rāmayaṇa (350), Adhyātma Rāmayaṇa (350) and Ānanda Rāmāyaṇa (703) 

Here is the Ānanda Rāmāyaṇa reference (1.1.72) which states 700 queens in addition to Kausalyā, Kaikeyī and Sumitrā 

https://archive.org/stream/HindiBookAnandRamayan/Hindi%20Book-Anand%20Ramayan#page/n20/mode/1up

[Hnbhat B.R.]

Thank you for clarification from Anandaramayana, which makes clear the idea of 350, mentioned as सार्धसप्तशताः the half of the total 700 wives, in Chapter 34. which might have been taken by the author of Anandaramayana. This makes some sense, why he used the same way to express the number as अर्धसप्तशतास्तास्तु   mentioning the number of queens who accompanied Kausalya and whom Rama bid farewell. But in this context Sumithra is left out. Kaikeyi might not be along with others. Or it may be a casual omission of the two other queens, but only mention of 350 who accompanied Kausalya, when Dasaratha asked Sumantra, all of his wives present in his harem. Though this is not relevant, to the question of total number of total wives, it is strange no mention of either Kausalya or Sumitra is made in this context, 

but in Ch.39 as त्रयश्शतशतार्धाश्च he mentions clearly(?) 3+hundreds and 50.  त्रेस्त्रयः आदेश is pointed out as आर्ष.

Anyhow, he mentions the number 350  directly, without reference to 700 number. In this chapter also कैकेयी and सुमित्रा are not mentioned, but only कौसल्या and the 350 mothers are mentioned. May be it did not deserve any specific mention in the context.

 

[Hnbhat B.R.]

On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 5:51 PM, Sampath Kumar <sampath...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear friends

 i studied 4 commentaries

1-Ramanujeeya

2-Govinda raajeeya

3-Thilaka

4-Tattva Deepika of Maheswara teertha, all are agreed those 350 are wives only

goodluck

गतप्रभा द्यौरिव भास्करं विना व्यपेतनक्षत्रगणेव शर्वरी।

पुरी बभासे रहिता महात्मना न चास्रकण्ठाऽकुलमार्गचत्वरा।।2.66.28।।

I wonder why one should discuss on the number of wives, leaving out the beautiful verses and their beauty in the Great poem by Valmiki, like the one above and many more points of relevance to the great poem.

A very beautiful उपमा. Of course, there should be many books on Ramayana and its literary and cultural aspects.

[Ajit Gargeshwari]

Thank you Dr. Bhat for closing this thread

Regards
Ajit Gargeshwari
न जायते म्रियते वा कदाचिन्नायं भूत्वा भविता वा न भूयः।
अजो नित्यः शाश्वतोऽयं पुराणो न हन्यते हन्यमाने शरीरे।।2.20।।