Sarga 75 of Yudhakanda is a charade on ethics that it is no more possible to maintain blatant pretense or deception, especially something so fullof pretense as to be a travesty. The description is grotesque and repulsive so much so that even semblance of explanation is not possible. But it cant be that bad. So let us see with open mind what exactly is it. In fact this posting was almost forced upon based on comments pouring in. See the coments 1(under Valivadh Topics List). The entire saraga (75) was first claimed to be in my imagination. 2. This happened when Rama was unconscious. So let us not blame him. 3. It was an accident not pre planned. 4. The monkeys did it and Hanuman was not aware of it. Etc. etc.
What is so horrible about it is that such facile alibis are given. The fact is that, The Lanka was set fire with premeditation. Sugriva orders to torch Lanka [ 6-75-03]. As Kumbhakarna and his children are dead Ravana will not be able to defend [ 6-75-02]. The instruction to toch was given to hanuman [ 6-75-01]. It is not that Valmiki is not aware of devastation and its impact. He uses the word (रौद्रे तस्मिन्निशामुखे)that awful evening. So he knows it is going to be awful[ 6-75-04]. The monkeys gleefully torched everything [ 6-75-06]. All valuables were burnt [ 6-75-08][ 6-75-09
][ 6-75-10][ 6-75-11][ 6-75-12,13]. Then it continues describing the rich city and its inhabitants, rich with Gold and Pearls etc. All burnt. The population running in fear. Valmiki describes it as equal to forest fire consuming everything in its bound. See the description of burning houses [ 6-75-27]. And the horror which only Valmiki can describe it [ 6-75-32]. Women howling were heard for 100 yojanas (could be 800 miles). Thus the description of burning city in more than 30 slokas. Was Rama unaware? No. Rama’s bows added to the terror[ 6-75-37]. Then Rama shoots [ 6-75-40] causing immense damage to the city gate. This leads to Ravana launching a disorderly fight.
What is the explanation for this. Things to be realized. One Rama is a King not God. And two he is not supposed to play a role which we approve of, but what is demanded of him. Here again the dharma of warfare as enunciated by Manu says as follows
7.195 उपरुध्य अरिम् असीत राष्ट्रं चास्यउपपीडये त् दूशष्येच् चास्य सततं यवसअन्नउधकइन्धनम्
7.195. When he has shut up his foe (in a town), let him sit encamped, harass his kingdom, and continually spoil his grass, food, fuel, and water
7.196 भिन्ध्यच् चएव तडागानि प्रकारपरिखास तथ समवस्कन्दयेच् चएनं रात्रौ वित्रासयेत् तथा
7.196. Likewise let him destroy the tanks, ramparts, and ditches, and let him assail the (foe unawares) and alarm him at night.
This is exactly what was done on रौद्रे तस्मिन्निशामुखे that violent evening.
Part of Rama….. a human character!!!
Referaence of Slokas
| Sanskrit | English |
| 6-75-03 | |
|
ये ये महाबलाः सन्ति लघवश्च प्लवंगमाः | लङ्कामभिपतन्त्वाशु गृह्योल्काः प्लवगर्षभाः || ६-७५-३ हरयो हरिसंकाशाः प्रदग्धुम् रावणालयम् | |
“Let those dexterous monkeys, possessing the strength of lions, taking torches in their hands, rush towards Lanka quickly, in order to set ablaze the abode of Ravana.” Back |
| 6-75-02 | |
|
यतो हतः कुम्भकर्णः कुमाराश्च निषूदिताः | नेदानीमुपनिर्हारम् रावनो दातुमर्हति || ६-७५-२ |
“Since Kumbhakarna and his four sons were killed, Ravana cannot give any defense now”. Back |
| 6-75-01 | |
|
ततोऽब्रवीन्महातेजाः सुग्रीवो वानरेश्वरः | अर्थ्यम् विज्ञापयंश्चापि हनूमन्तमिदं वचः || ६-७५-१ |
Then, Sugreeva of great majesty, the king of monkeys spoke (the following) meaningful words to Hanuma, in order to inform him what they should do next. Back |
| 6-75-04 | |
|
ततोऽस्तं गत आदित्ये रौद्रे तस्मिन्निशामुखे || ६-७५-४ लङ्कामभिमुखाः सोल्का जग्मुस्ते प्लवगर्षभाः | |
Then at the sunset of that awful evening, those foremost of the monkeys, went towards Lanka, with torches in their hands.Back |
| 6-75-06 | |
|
गोपुराट्टप्रतोलीषु चर्यासु विविधासु च || ६-७५-६ प्रासादेषु च संहृष्टाः ससृजुस्ते हुताशनम् | |
Those monkeys, feeling gladdened, threw fire to the towering gates, attics, streets, various byways and mansions.Back |
| 6-75-08 | |
|
अगुरुर्दह्यते तत्र परं चैव सुचन्दनम् || ६-७५-८ मौक्तिका मणयः स्निग्धा वज्रं चापि प्रवालकम् | |
Aloe, excellent sandalwood of great value, pearls, glossy gems, diamonds and corals were burnt there. Back |
| 6-75-09 | |
|
क्षौमम् च दह्यते तत्र करुशेयं चापि शोभनम् || ६-७५-९ आविकं विविधं चौर्णं काञ्चनं भाण्डमायुधम् | |
Linen, charming silk, blankets of sheep’s wool, various kinds of ram’s wool, gold ornaments and weapons were burnt there.Back |
| 6-75-10 | |
|
नानाविकृतसंस्थानम् वाजिभाण्डपरिच्छदम् || ६-७५-१० गजग्रैवेयकक्ष्याश्च रथभाण्डाश्च संस्कृताः | |
The ornaments, saddles etc. of diverse and peculiar designs of horses, the chains worn round the neck of the elephants as also their girths and polished ornaments meant for the chariots were also burnt. Back |
| 6-75-11 | |
|
तनुत्राणि च योधानां हस्त्यश्वानाम् च चर्म च || ६-७५-११ खड्गा धनूंषि ज्याबाणास्तोमराङ्कुशशक्तयः | |
Coats of mail of the warriors, the armour of the elephants and horses, swords, bows, bow-strings, arrows, lances, goads and javelins were burnt there.Back |
| 6-75-13 | |
|
रोओमजं वालजं चर्म व्याघ्रजं चाण्डजं बहु || ६-७५-१२ मुक्तामणिविचित्रांश्च प्रासादांश्च समन्ततः | विविधानस्त्रसंघातानग्निर्दहति तत्र वै || ६-७५-१३ |
The fire raging on all sides burnt blankets and rugs made of the hair of animals, whisks made of the hair of the tails, the skins of tigers, many birds, palaces inlaid with pearls and gems and various kinds of stores of arms. Back |
| 6-75-27 | |
|
हर्म्याग्रैर्दह्यमानैश्च ज्वालाप्रज्वलितैरपि | रात्रौ सा दृश्यते लङ्का पुष्पितैरिव किंशुकैः || ६-७५-२७ |
That City of Lanka at night with its house-tops being burnt ablaze with flames, looked like Kimshuka trees in full bloom. Back |
| 6-75-32 | |
|
नारीजनस्य धूमेन व्याप्तस्योच्चैर्विनेदुषः | स्वनो ज्वलनतप्तस्य शुश्रुवे शतयोजनम् || ६-७५-३२ |
The noise of the women-folk, who were burnt by fire and covered with smoke, roaring loudly, was heard upto one hundred Yojanas (or eight hundred miles). Back |
| 6-75-37 | |
|
अशोभत तदा रामो धनुर्विस्फारयन् महत् | भगवानिव सम्क्रुद्धो भवो वेदमयं धनुः || ६-७५-३७ |
Rama, drawing his great bow, was as shining at that time as Lord Shiva (the source of Universe), stretching his bow, consisting of the Vedas in a great wrath (as at the time of dissolution of the Universe). [ Back |
| 6-75-40 | |
|
तस्य कार्मुकनिर्मुक्तैः शरैस्तत्पुरगोपुरम् | कैलासशृङ्गप्रतिमं विशीर्णमपतद्भुवि || ६-७५-४० |
By the arrows released from Rama’s bow, the main gate of that City looking like a peak of Mount Kailasa, tumbled down, shattered, to the ground. Back |
Understanding Ramayana 
Sep 15, 2011 @ 02:52:09
vishalyau cha mahaatmaanau taavubhau raamalakShmaNau |
asambhraantau jagR^ihatuste ubhe dhanuShii vare || 6-75-35
Healed of their wounds and unperplexed, both those great souled princes, Rama and Lakshmana seized hold of those two excellent bows.
Its highly improbable that you’d know the exact scenario when you are hurt or unconscious and there are no proper dialogue when Rama is said to be aware. It was sugreeva order.
Seeing the fall of Makaraksha, all those demons, tormented by the fear of Rama’s arrows, ran away straight to Lanka.
Rama is not killing army who is fleeing , Infact there are many such instances
You also forget to mention the genocide by Indrajit by Brahma weapon and the description is way more graph
Sep 15, 2011 @ 23:07:45
No No. 5 slokas Rama thundering his bow Cannot be in a state of trance. Why do you not consider the word unperplexed written by you. We have to understand it Not jump to defent Rama and Lakshmana. I have quoted manusmriti slokas. War is last alternative. and in war all wepons have to be used and all strategies have to adopted. The first point is Manusmriti asks you (or the king) to do this and guides how war has to be fought. Sugriva is a learned person according to Rama and should be expert in Manusmriti that is why he initiates this and asks Hanuman to set fire
Sep 17, 2011 @ 03:26:20
In that case Manusmriti contradict Mahabharata Bhisma parva section 1 which give guidelines which are quit humane
O bull of Bharata’s race, regarding the different
kinds of combat. Persons equally circumstanced must encounter each other,
fighting fairly. And if having fought fairly the combatants withdraw
(without fear of molestation), even that would be gratifying to us. Those
who engaged in contests of words should be fought against with words.
Those that left the ranks should never be slain.[7] A car-warrior should
have a car-warrior for his antagonist; he on the neck of an elephant
should have a similar combatant for his foe; a horse should be met by a
horse, and a foot-soldier, O Bharata; should be met by a foot-soldier.
Sep 17, 2011 @ 03:27:24
continued
Guided by considerations of fitness, willingness, daring and might, one
should strike another, giving notice. No one should strike another that
is unprepared[8] or panic-struck. One engaged with another, one seeking
quarter, one retreating, one whose weapon is rendered unfit, uncased in
mail, should never be struck. Car-drivers, animals (yoked to cars or
carrying weapons) men engaged in the transport of weapons,[9] players on
drums and blowers of conches should never be struck. Having made these
covenants, the Kurus, and the Pandavas, and the Somakas wondered much,
gazing at each other. And having stationed (their forces thus), those
bulls among men, those high-souled ones, with their troops, became glad
at heart, their joy being reflected on their countenances.”
Sep 17, 2011 @ 10:01:22
This exactly as per manusmriti. I have quoted the sloka from manusmriti in duty of god or king The sloka is न च हन्यात् स्तलारुढं नीबं न कत अन्जलिं न मुकेशं न असीनं न तव अस्मि इति वादिनम्: 7.91. The enemy when weak is being terrorised in the 75 th sarga. That is different The ladies are not fighting they are infact sleeping. It i in complicated situations that we need to open our mind and understand before coming to any conclusion