Rama and the Ramayana: Crash Course World Mythology #27
video description
Date: 2022-04-04
Related videos
Comments and reviews: 10
Zendruo
Highly convoluted and misinterpreted story telling. Don't upload videos when there is no one among you who has any knowledge about the original texts. To pint out the wrongness in your story telling, there is no mention of Ravan's sister and his act of revenge by kidnapping Sita; Ravan wanted to marry Sita and was in her Swambar-sabha but not after she was married to Ram; there is no mention of the stone bridge built to Lanka; and incorrect dialogue fitting to Ram's mouth at 8: 39 timestamp and the returning the life of dead monkeys. Also, he was never doubtful of Sita, I don't know how this wrong information is widely presented in the internet. Also don't paint his love and loyalty to his wife as a matter of pride, it is also common trend in by the translators.
Lastly, he was not blue, rather light skin and his aesthetic beauty was considered inhuman. Its just in the painting where he is blue to represent his aura/halo.
reply
Highly convoluted and misinterpreted story telling. Don't upload videos when there is no one among you who has any knowledge about the original texts. To pint out the wrongness in your story telling, there is no mention of Ravan's sister and his act of revenge by kidnapping Sita; Ravan wanted to marry Sita and was in her Swambar-sabha but not after she was married to Ram; there is no mention of the stone bridge built to Lanka; and incorrect dialogue fitting to Ram's mouth at 8: 39 timestamp and the returning the life of dead monkeys. Also, he was never doubtful of Sita, I don't know how this wrong information is widely presented in the internet. Also don't paint his love and loyalty to his wife as a matter of pride, it is also common trend in by the translators.
Lastly, he was not blue, rather light skin and his aesthetic beauty was considered inhuman. Its just in the painting where he is blue to represent his aura/halo.
reply
Pawan
I-m not sure who this Campbell person is, but this is probably the most ridiculous interpretation of the Beautiful Love Story called RAMAYAN. Has Crash Course even studied anything about this Epic? The way the events are explained are incorrect, and does no justice. How is a non-Hindu or non-Indian supposed to learn from such a video, if it is not even factually correct? Either make videos about what you are an expert on, or at least share information that is accurate and known to the majority of the adherents or experts of the Field/Text being discussed. Either that Campbell person doesn-t understand RAMAYAN, or the makers of this video totally misinterpreted Campbell-s thoughts/the Epic as whole.
reply
I-m not sure who this Campbell person is, but this is probably the most ridiculous interpretation of the Beautiful Love Story called RAMAYAN. Has Crash Course even studied anything about this Epic? The way the events are explained are incorrect, and does no justice. How is a non-Hindu or non-Indian supposed to learn from such a video, if it is not even factually correct? Either make videos about what you are an expert on, or at least share information that is accurate and known to the majority of the adherents or experts of the Field/Text being discussed. Either that Campbell person doesn-t understand RAMAYAN, or the makers of this video totally misinterpreted Campbell-s thoughts/the Epic as whole.
reply
-sm
So he lead an army of conscious living beings to death, not to even say he saved his wife; but,
one: to not let his wife be in the hands of another man, (so him banishing her in the end is proper? how? that words can only become logically consistent with each other if him banishing her sort of means divorceish and makes her none of his business so her protection is none of his business too. guess if she had not burned herself, and left, and someone kidnapped her again, this time rama wouldn't move even a finger.
and two: to punish the one who kidnapped his wife.
Wife herself has nothing to do with anything. Have I misunderstood?
reply
So he lead an army of conscious living beings to death, not to even say he saved his wife; but,
one: to not let his wife be in the hands of another man, (so him banishing her in the end is proper? how? that words can only become logically consistent with each other if him banishing her sort of means divorceish and makes her none of his business so her protection is none of his business too. guess if she had not burned herself, and left, and someone kidnapped her again, this time rama wouldn't move even a finger.
and two: to punish the one who kidnapped his wife.
Wife herself has nothing to do with anything. Have I misunderstood?
reply
biofycan
I feel like the Brahmin lightskin priests were ashamed to say that some of the Gods were darkskin. So, they altered history by representing those Gods as blue beings. Lesson learned throughout history is that we only get to read the version of the one writing it and due to the caste system at the time, those lightskin Brahmins were the only ones allow to read and write. Hence, they wrote all the vedas and other sacred books. By the way, didn't Lakshmana/Rama cut Ravana's sister nose hence, he got upset and kidnapped Sita?
reply
I feel like the Brahmin lightskin priests were ashamed to say that some of the Gods were darkskin. So, they altered history by representing those Gods as blue beings. Lesson learned throughout history is that we only get to read the version of the one writing it and due to the caste system at the time, those lightskin Brahmins were the only ones allow to read and write. Hence, they wrote all the vedas and other sacred books. By the way, didn't Lakshmana/Rama cut Ravana's sister nose hence, he got upset and kidnapped Sita?
reply
Vidit
Note: Bharat was never crowned King. He was away to his maternal home when all this gappened and Ram was banished. When he and Shatrughana returned, they were unhappy with Kaikeyi. He went to bring Ram back, he refused to do so in order to fulfill his late father's wiah but Bharat takes Ram's sandals and places them on the throne as a symbil of his rule. He runs the kingdom as he lives in a small hut, not the palace, in nearby village just like his brother and sleeps underground.
reply
Note: Bharat was never crowned King. He was away to his maternal home when all this gappened and Ram was banished. When he and Shatrughana returned, they were unhappy with Kaikeyi. He went to bring Ram back, he refused to do so in order to fulfill his late father's wiah but Bharat takes Ram's sandals and places them on the throne as a symbil of his rule. He runs the kingdom as he lives in a small hut, not the palace, in nearby village just like his brother and sleeps underground.
reply
Parth
First thing, Bharata refused to be king and went to the foredt to find Rama and put his paduka(wooden flipfops) on the throne to show his brother is still king. Next Lakman cut Ravan-s sisters nose and so he got angry and sent his brother to kill Rama. Sugrive asks Ram to kill his elder brother(cuz he was possessed) and then when Sugrive becomes king and helps Ram. Next the Sita was being swaped by the God of fire by the clone of Sita that Ravana kidnapped
reply
First thing, Bharata refused to be king and went to the foredt to find Rama and put his paduka(wooden flipfops) on the throne to show his brother is still king. Next Lakman cut Ravan-s sisters nose and so he got angry and sent his brother to kill Rama. Sugrive asks Ram to kill his elder brother(cuz he was possessed) and then when Sugrive becomes king and helps Ram. Next the Sita was being swaped by the God of fire by the clone of Sita that Ravana kidnapped
reply
Rushil
The stories of Hindu Mythology cannot fit Joseph Campbell's Hero Myth because it is based on Greek Mythology. Ramayana is not a hero/victim/villain story. It is the biography of Ram, who is Avatar, infinite limitless divinity taking limited finite form to establish Dharma. This video is a nice try but its very reductive of the message and meaning of Ramayana. Plus the story provided in this video is an incomplete one. Still A for Effort: )
reply
The stories of Hindu Mythology cannot fit Joseph Campbell's Hero Myth because it is based on Greek Mythology. Ramayana is not a hero/victim/villain story. It is the biography of Ram, who is Avatar, infinite limitless divinity taking limited finite form to establish Dharma. This video is a nice try but its very reductive of the message and meaning of Ramayana. Plus the story provided in this video is an incomplete one. Still A for Effort: )
reply
Marc
The story that is shorten reminds in some case to the -greek- Mythology and north mythology. MOST the story of the battle of Troja seems to have MANY paralell aspekts. Other stuff reminds me to Sumerian mythology. Even the adam and Eve story with eve getting -seduced by the Snake seems to fit in the story in some strange way. So if the gods look at humans as -apes- the whole story become very. strange in some way.
reply
The story that is shorten reminds in some case to the -greek- Mythology and north mythology. MOST the story of the battle of Troja seems to have MANY paralell aspekts. Other stuff reminds me to Sumerian mythology. Even the adam and Eve story with eve getting -seduced by the Snake seems to fit in the story in some strange way. So if the gods look at humans as -apes- the whole story become very. strange in some way.
reply
Dee8Bee
Doesn-t matter if it was Rama or the people that questioned Sita. She should-ve given them all the finger. I personally only know the story where the people questioned her. As if her being forced upon needs more punishment, even back then they had victim blaming. So the story I heard was that Rama believed his wife, but she did it to shut the plebs up.
reply
Doesn-t matter if it was Rama or the people that questioned Sita. She should-ve given them all the finger. I personally only know the story where the people questioned her. As if her being forced upon needs more punishment, even back then they had victim blaming. So the story I heard was that Rama believed his wife, but she did it to shut the plebs up.
reply
Rohini
You forgot to mention Bharat who didn't took the throne, lived like a saint as devotee of Ram for 14 years and he dug a pit so as to sleep below Ram, who when exiled slept on floor. He is hero in his own place. You should also study about Urmila, wife of Laksham.
reply
You forgot to mention Bharat who didn't took the throne, lived like a saint as devotee of Ram for 14 years and he dug a pit so as to sleep below Ram, who when exiled slept on floor. He is hero in his own place. You should also study about Urmila, wife of Laksham.
reply
Add a review, comment
Other channel videos
