![]() ![]() As the sub-title makes clear, this isn’t the entire Ramcharitmanas. That’s where Pavan Varma scores, without being superficial. To appreciate Rohini, one has to be a bit of a scholar. To appreciate Tiwari, one has to be ready within, from inside. Hence, both Rohini and Arun might be perceived to be heavy reading. If one is interested in a deeply reflective and introspective modern interpretation, with both the Awadhi and an English translation, cross-referencing and placing Ramcharimanas against the backdrop of Valmiki Ramayana and Adhyatma Ramayana, Tiwari should be the pick.Īn impatient generation lacks both time and inclination. However, Rohini only has the English translation, in verse. Every reference is chased down, as a researcher would. If one wishes to understand nuances of poetry, differences between chaupai and doha, and is academically inclined, Rohini is best. They add to the corpus, in their own individual ways. These aren’t substitutes for one another. I can think of four examples: (1) Gita Press translation of Ramcharitmanas in English (2004) (2) An extensive verse by verse translation by Rohini Chowdhury (2019) (3) Arun Tiwari’s interpretation (2019) and (4) this latest one by Pavan Varma (2020). I think a better statement is that a new generation of authors and translators is translating and interpreting Ramcharitmanas for a new generation of readers. Other than various Gita texts, it has the entire Ramcharitmanas online, in Awadhi, without a translation. Most people will probably have heard of the Gita Supersite. Even in English, Frederick Growse translated Ramcharitmanas as early as 1883. There has always been interest in Ramcharitmanas it is just that more is being written about Ramcharitmanas in English. There seems to be a resurgence of interest in Ramcharitmanas. (I will continue to use Rama, though for Ramcharitmanas alone, Ram is more appropriate.) Tulsidas wrote in Awadhi (we can accept that as a dialect of Hindi) and deSanskritised and popularised the Rama story. To appreciate Ramcharitmanas, with its building block of bhakti, a reading of Adhyatma Ramayana is preferable to Valmiki Ramayana. Ramleela performances are based more on Ramcharitmanas than Valmiki Ramayana. Across a large swathe of India, that influence was due to Tulsidas (about whose life we only know the bare bones) and Ramcharitmanas. Perceptions about Rama and Ramayana, and faith in Rama, aren’t primarily driven by Sanskrit versions, but often by non-Sanskrit renderings, vernacular languages so to speak. For example, in Sanskrit, we have (1) Valmiki Ramayana (2) Adhyatma Ramayana (3) Yogavasishtha Ramayana (4) Rama’s story in Raghuvamsham and (5) Ramayana story in Mahabharata. ![]() For Ramayana, there are Sanskrit and non-Sanskrit versions. Despite some regional variations, the Mahabharata story is essentially one. There are several versions of the Ramayana story. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |