Why did the Mahabharata and the Ramayana happen only in India? Why weren't these epics mentioned in any other location?
Have you watched the Oscar-winning film Gladiator?The protagonist Maximus (Russell Crowe) is a Roman General who is stripped of his rank and later taken prisoner. His family is taken away from him, he is subjected to slavery and his troubles continue. The entire film only mentions Rome, Greece or other states of ancient Europe.The film is full of ups and downs, deals with and captures intense human emotions and has fights between the good and bad guys. It is much like the two Indian epics.Why did 'Gladiator' happen only in Roman Empire? Why doesn't it mention any other location?It doesn't mention other things because the plot revolves around a character based in Rome. Similarly, since the Mahabharata and Ramayan talk about events in India, there is no necessity to mention other places. The things that are central to the story are conveyed and the writer doesn't concern himself with dragging extra, unnecessary things.There have been brief mentions of certain non-Indian nations which were trade partners. Leaving that, the authors might not have warranted the need to deviate from the tale.
Are there any stories of Mahabharata outside Indian mythology?
In Mahabharata it is believed that many empires outside India were also involved. So are there any stories regarding this event in their mythology /history?Afghanistan and Bangladesh were part of India then. Even to an extent Iran. So I am looking at countries like Greece, China, Egypt etc. who had civilization running several millennium and had the possibility to participate in the war. I don't think there was much involvement from such countries in the war, except Chinese, who are mentioned to be part of Bhagadatta's army. Bhagadatta was Narakasura's son and he ruled Pragjyotishapura (present day Assam + parts of North-east). Since Krishna killed his father Narakasura, Bhagadatta sided with Kauravas. And given the regional proximity Chinese could have been part of this army and it could be possible that they (Chinese) fought for Kauravas. However, I haven't heard any legend from other civilizations referring Mahabharatha.
Which came first: the Ramayana or the Mahabharata?
Ramayana and then Mahabharata...There are some proves of Mahabharata battle here and there that suggest that it was more recent. Also, as per the legends there were few warriors who were a part of both the wars. The timeline of their appearance clears more doubts: 1. Hanuman - He was born in the same yug as Rama and got his main recognition only after he met him and became his disciple.In Mahabharata, hanuman appears as a very old warrior who comes in to humble Bheem when latter was in vanity of his strength. Later Hanuman's figure appeared on the war banner of the main chariot of Pandavas too. 2. Jambavantha:In the epic Ramayana, Jambavantha helped Rama find his wife Sita and fight her abductor,Ravana. It is he who makes Hanuman realize his immense capabilities and encourages him to fly across the ocean to search for Sita in Lanka.e had received a boon from Lord Rama that he would have a long life, be handsome and would have the strength of ten million lions. In the Mahabharata, Jambavantha had killed a lion, who had acquired a gem called Syamantaka from Prasena after killing him. Krishna was suspected of killing Prasena for the jewel, so he tracked Prasena's steps until he learned that he had been killed by a lion who had been killed by a bear. Krishna tracked Jambavantha to his cave and a fight ensued. After eighteen days, realizing who Krishna was, Jambavantha submitted. He gave Krishna the gem and also presented him his daughter Jambavati, who became one of Krishna's wives.
How do South Indians and Sri Lankans feel about the portrayal of their ancestors as "rakshas" in the books written by North Indians?
I am a South Indian, as Southie as it gets, and I grew up listening to the Ramayan, Mahabharat and tales from Indian mythology, from story books and then my grandmother. I never saw Ravan or Hiranyakasipu or Narakasura or Mahishasura as my ancestors at any stage. At least in Andhra Pradesh, we were thought they were the evil Asuras who needed to be vanquished by good.In the South, Dussehra is celebrated in memory of Durga slaying the demon Mahishasur, and nobody considers him as their ancestors. Of course of late there are some groups that show Mahishasur as an OBC who is killed by the upper caste Devas, but that is another topic altogether.The same with Diwali, which is celebrated as Naraka Chaturdasi, down South, commemorating the killing of the Asura, Narakusura, by Krishna's consort Satyabhama. I don't think many see him as their ancestor who is killed by some North Indian Gods or Goddesses. Yes Ravan is worshipped and revered in some places down South, but there is a temple dedicated to Ravan in Kanpur, right in the Hindi heartland that is. And that is because he is often respected as a great scholar, musician and warrior in his own right, who fell because of his lust.The fact of the matter is, be it North or South, the Mahabharat and Ramayan are taken in the same way by most common people. And there have been Tamil, Telugu, Kannada, Malayali versions of both epics too, with no real significant changes. So Ram and Krishna are as adored here down South as they are in the North, except that here, they are represented as more dark skinned.And finally, South Indians is not one homogenous unit, I am from Andhra Pradesh, am South Indian, but there are a lot of differences between Telugu and Tamil people or Telugu and Malayalis, and please we really have nothing at all in common with Sri Lankans.
Language and literature in ancient and medieval times in india?
Ancient folktales of India come down to us primarily in two collections of stories many of which are about animals. These are the Buddhist tales of the former lives of the Buddha known as the Jatakas and the Panchatantra [traditional Hindu animal stories considered a textbook for wise conduct in this world]. Many of the original stories probably predate the Buddha, but the Jatakas were organized into verses about the Buddha and placed into his biography starting about the fourth century BC, though the whole collection with its prose stories and commentaries was not completed for several centuries. The Jataka tales always begin with an incident in the life of the Buddha, usually a sermon he is giving which he illustrates with a story from one of his previous lives. After the tale is told he often indicates who were the other characters in the story of their previous existence. In this way the law of karma, or the consequences of actions, is illustrated, and the deep patterns of different souls can be seen. The Buddha, who is referred to as the Bodhisattva in the stories since he is then a future Buddha, is usually the most heroic and wisest character. He is often an animal or a tree spirit and is frequently the leader of his group. He never seems to be a female, and in fact there is a strong bias against women in many stories. The Jatakas are primarily moral tales illustrating the wisdom and goodness of the Bodhisattva figure, and, with the exception of the prejudice against women, the ethical lessons are usually quite good. (4th Century) The greatest imaginative literature of ancient India can be found in the long epic poems, the Ramayana and the Mahabharata. Written over many centuries and not completed until sometime between the fourth century BC and the fourth century CE, they probably grew out of the story-telling of the traditional bards (sutas) who acted as charioteers to kings. Here is a site that will give you all of the background you need to know about the Ramayana and the Mahabharata. Good luck on your project!! http://web.cocc.edu/cagatucci/classes/hu...