Very interesting to observe Raavan as one who thought of himself as having 10 heads and 20 arms, rather than being a vikrut Rakshas. The throne - crown aspect is very fascinating, and I never thought of it before.
Hi. Kindly don't trust blindly the video. Please read and *study* Maharishi Valmiki's Sri Ramayanam. There are many references to Ravana having 20 arms, Grey skin, extremely tall height and ten heads. Also Rakshasas were "Tamas" deha daaris meaning had body type with base guna/trait of Tamas. They were NOT humans. They were a different race. This can be confirmed from the pointed multiple references in the Sri Ramayanam itself. Please study the Itihaasa 🙏 If he had headgear then it would have been written that he used to remove the headgear and keep it down. However this was not the case. It could be argued now that he wore "headgear" while sleep because he was so infatuated with his crown. ..... Thing is it is clearly mentioned that he cut his own head and offered in the Yagna Kunda 10 times to gain boon from Brahma Deva. He was named "Dashanan" since birth due to him having the potential to manifest 10 heads. He also lifted the Kailasa mountain - impossible feat for humans. These interpretations are throwing many direct evidences, mentions and cross references to the sea. Don't do that 🙏
@@TheB657You didn't understand the meaning of itihas then. History with katha is Itihas. You pressure people to follow itihas granth as it is. That's why itihas Granth also seen as mythology. It is far better to understand itihas with your brain & logic then believing it as imagination mythology
Our Forefathers have described our history in Such a brilliant way & Some foolish people around us Constantly calling it Mythology. Humble Request all viewers, try to add more subscribers to @21Notes, as this team is doing such a great work for us.
This is this is what I am dreaming to come out and spread across the globe about Ravana's character. How he feared to go against Ram & then choose by abducting Sita with no intention of "taking revenge for sister". The television and reels suck the real history !!!!!
Yess another doubt still remains is mantramugdh aastras, like brahmastra, pashupatastra, can they also be defined in such simple concepts, or there are things we still do not understand, like parshuram also being cheeranjivi, how can this be explained?
@@dead34311 we can not explain all these TILL NOW.in future as science update, we will be able to explain. science is very immature child who is developing everyday to help us develop and innovate. Science is based on our assumptions and our visions. Our assumptions are never perfect, and our vision is very limited.
About vanar, description is given on season 1...a full episode is based on Vanar. I request everybody to please watch from the beginning of seasons otherwise u missed lot of things...don't cherry pick the episodes/season. Thnx
If there is no mention of 10 heads and 20 arms in first mentioned description of ravan and mentioned when seen was shifted to his courtyard, I guess you are right about head gear
We have done 4 seasons in the last three years. But the pace will pick-up now since we are working to finish all English seasons before making Hindi Season 4. 🙏
A rakshas/rakshasi was someone who had total disdain for societal norms . You can equate them with the hippie movement but far more violent . They always existed but only became powerful when a strong centre came forward like Ravan in this case . I want 21Notes to correct me if I am wrong as this is my theory. 😄🙏
The 1400 year old cult has similar traits. Maal-e-ghanimat i.e. treating others wives and daughters as slaves for physical enjoyment, robbing and killing civilians for their money, forcing them to convert and lastly, breaking temples and vigrahas (deity in statue form). You may read 'Understanding Mohammad' by Ali Sina and see for yourself.
This is powerful and engaging. I really appreciate it And now i am going to play these Hindi version series in my home I am thinking that valmiki ji knows how itihasa got distorted over the time so he gives this much detailing. In the section where vanara was discussed how one shlok was saying clearly that from where vanara,rakshasa and others comes like they knew conflict would happen which shows that may be they had experienced such distortion of their that time itihasa so he took care of all of that.
why do you think Ravan can't have 10 heads and twenty arms, when Valmiki ji was clear about many of things, why it is difficult to digest that Ravan indeed had 10 heads, that was a different time, and Ravan did possess many supernatural abilities, i think we should not try to analyze Ramayana with knowledge of today, (Can someone today cross Ocean in one leap?, People fight in sky?) otherwise nice video
In the Sunderakand, Maharshi Valmiki has given a detailed physical description of Ravan. There he talks of only one head and two arms. We will cover this in a later episode. 🙏
@@21Notes thank you!! This is what we don’t do. That is read the original abd make an attempt to see what Rishi Valmiki actually said. Similarly on vaanaras once Sri Nilesh Oakji mentioned that Valmiki talks of tails only when it comes to hanuman and sugriva and Bali - but when he talks of Tara or Ruma they are just like usual women - no tail description. This is where he said the tail was probably a part of their dress code or warrior uniform code.
Exactly ! I don't get these wokeism inflicted people at all ! We have "realized" spirituality in Bharat for God's sake these people are ruining it. "..we should not try to analyze Ramayana with knowledge of today..." - VERY WELL SAID 👏🙏
@@21Notes In Sundarakanda when Sri Hanuman ji hovers over Ravan in his palace he is mentioned to be having 20 hands and 10 heads. It is quite clearly mentioned. We respect you Sir and the effort is commendable on the video but PLEASE 🙏 A honest sincere plea to not contort the Valmiki Ramayana.
@@hariniswaminathan6494 Issue is Indians not reading their own scriptures or Itihaasas. It is clearly mentioned of the divine abilities of Devas and Tamasic abilities of Rakshasas. They weren't humans by a stretch of imagination. They had different bodies with different predominant Gunas which allowed them a sway over nature human beings won't have due to balanced Triguna. When Yoga Vasishta mentions spirituality A - Z then why can't we cleanly agree to divine capabilities of Spiritually endowed beings of those times ??
Yes, Valmiki has also called Ravan Dashanan, the one with ten faces. But as mentioned in the episode, this should be understood as the one who appeared to have ten faces, and did not actually have ten heads.
@@21Notes Why should you interpret in your own way than just straightforwardly stating whatever is written in the Valmiki Ramayanam ? Aren't we Indians already exposed to spirituality and the Truth that this creation is just 'mithya' - Maya ! Then why isn't all this possible ?? Sir please, please don't take the spirituality away from the epic. Rakshasas are mentioned as having certain otherworldly abilities quite clearly in the Valmiki Ramayana. If your version of interpretation to be considered then it is better to say that the entire Ramayan was a fiction because Sri Hanuman ji returning Sanjeevani from Himalayas in a single day and then returning the mountain back (that requires immense strenght) could not be achieved at all. Unless you will twist the story by saying there was some peak called Himalayas within Sri Lanka and Sri Hanuman ji just brought few herbs from the area - huge alteration of facts like you did with the Sundarakanda ! Sri Hanuman ji having flied with "wind coursing through his bodies" are clearly clearly mentioned ! Also then how Sri Hanuman ji get Sri Garuda to get rid of the Naga Pasha on Sri Rama and Lakshmana ? If you have had some background in Yoga then you would have agreed 100% with the Valmiki Ramayana. The mountains had wings is also quoted in the Sundarkanda by the son of Himvant, Mainak. So how would you explain that ?? Please 🙏 Bharatiyas don't shoot at your own feet by further contorting the scriptures with your own limited interpretation. I say this as someone in the field of Science and having "realized" spirituality. Valmiki Ramayanam mentions history as it is and it is cent percent true that beings in those days had divine capabilities.
6:29 - Please don't start assuming with words like "most likely" , "maybe" etc. to satisfy the modern day westernized colonized brain that hates to grasp spirituality and cosmic truths which is beyond logic. Ravana did not wear a headgear. It is clearly given in the Valmiki Ramayana that he had 10 heads and 20 arms. This is also cited in the Sundarkanda when he is found by Sri Hanuman ji to be sleeping with his many wives on a single bed. *Please don't alter the contents of the Itihaasa.* 🙏 I do appreciate your way of narration and articulation of details but twisting facts will give you great problems in the same narration ahead.
Maha shiv bhakt nahi lalchi kaho, maha shiv bhakt to raam the bina kisi lalach, bhay ya irsha ke unke bhakt the. Qki yadi ravan maha shiv bhakt hota to shiv ji ke nirdeshanushaar chalta na ki unke diye huwe astro pe ahamkaar karke nirdosh logo pe atyachaar karta. Shiv ji to bhole h usi bholepan ka durupyog kiya tha is rakshash ravan ne
Can we avoid words describing a woman as per her physical appearance mostly the crap created by westernized minds. Sita could be defined in a much better way.
@@21Notes What kind of clothes woman wore in those times? I'm asking this because in one of the lectures of Bibek Debroy he says woman only wore two clothes covering upper and lower part and when Sita Devi was kidnapped she throws her upper clothes with some jewellery. Can you please confirm about this claim? He was talking about Draupadi's vastra haran where he mentioned this as well.
Historians like Valmiki and Vedvyas were very Frank and didn't shy away from given details and statements which in modern times due to various invasions our vedic society may find taboo or obscene. But we should not forget that this is the culture where Naga sadhus exists, digambar traditions exists, intimate relationships were described in kamasutra with great detail, temples have carvings which can be called orgy sessions. So this definition of what is obscene varies from time to time and culture. And for us our culture is currently shadowed by West where any kind of nudity is offence.
@@SomprakashShukla Temple carvings do not express orgy sessions. You are fundamentally wrong. The reason for those carvings is for the devotees of the temple to look at all the carvings carefully so that their excitement reduces and they become calm before entering temple. It's one type of meditation which is largely popular even now. People in those days wrote on how to do everything in a proper way so they wrote about basically everything. Just like present. Porn exists. That doesn't mean every human involves in that profession or lifestyle right? Only certain minor population involves in it. Mostly in Vedic times people emphasized on discipline. Not looseness.
@@phoenixj1299 you have not understood the context in which I made that statemen. I'm aware of the reason why the naked statues are there in different ranging from Khajuraho to konark sun temple. I just cited them as examples to say that nudity was not considered as obscene in ancient times as it is considered today. I never said that the temple carvings are orgy. Let me rephrase What My statement meant "the carvings on the temple for any person with limited knowledge may find them to be orgy sessions, but yet those carvings were not considered in anyway obscene"
