Who was Ravan ?

Dasehra festival is related with the story of Ram when every year countrywide specially in north India the Ram Leelas are held. Last day the statues of Ravan and his two companions are burnt. Means the hero of Dasehra is Ram and the villain is Ravan. But in the eve of same Dasehra from the far places of the country the news about the traditional grievance every year comes too. The day when Ravan statues are burnt some houses have the condition of grievance even the food is not prepared . It is heared that in north India there are many villages where the small small temples of Ravan are there too but they are not mentioned anywhere. Now the news came that near the capital Delhi the actual temple of "Lord Ravan" is being built. Construction started and by next Dasehra it will be ready. In the village Bisrakh this temple is being contructed with the expenditure of almost two crores. In that village neither any Ram mandir is there nor any akhand path of Ramayen could take place there. People of the village say that whenever some one tried to read Ramayen he could not finish reading it. Some calamity took him over. (Indian Express 26th September) A member of Ravan mandir society Anil Koushik says that with compared to other lords and lordesses Ravan was a charecterized Individual.

Who and and when changed the story
Ram, Seeta, Ramayen, this is all the matter of aastha and beleif, according to that the king of Lanka Ravan was a cruel and unkind ruler who dishonoured seeta ji. This story is being taught to Indian generations since a long time. Many generations grown reading this story in syllabi books. Ram being nayek and Ravan khalnayek is their beleif. Now in this situation if Ravan, some people start praising and worshipping him saying he was a charecterful hero, a just ruler and a very big learned individual, this will be an interesting thing. The stories of respecting Ravan and disrespecting Ram were common in Tamilnadu, but those who do that did not beieve in any devi devta. Whereas in north India people worshipping Ravan are the worshippers of shiv and claim that Ravan was a shiv bhagt too. Sincere historians always avoided arguing about this story and left it saying this is the matter of aastha. But the fundamental question anyway raises in minds that what actually the story is ? If the story is messed up then who is behind it ? In the fight of a learned brahmin (Ravan) and a chatri prince (Ram) , if Ram is declared Hero and Ravan is declared villain, then who did this and why did they do that ?

Denial of facts is an old tradition
The interference with historical facts, is an old tradition in Bharat Varsh. It is also told about vedas and other dharmic books that they are not present in the actual language. The old communities history is also disrupted. Beleifs were changed. If observed it seems like for this the same faction is responsible which came from outside and devided the old bharat varsh people in four lower and higher casts based on their birth. Kept itself in higher and ruling position, and based on the same beleif set a social system. Beleifs for humans were established. Then everything they made under their own system. Then those who were outside their beleifs, they were declared nether and their everything was declared wrong. The lie and cheating against them was called legitimate. Since fabricating the historical facts is the left hand game of this community, that is why they tried to prove all the muslim rulers, cruel and ruthless and tried to prove entire period of muslim rule a dark age. Incorrect stories were fabricated related to Babri Majid construction. The mention about the period of muslim rule is very far even the muslims participation in the freedom struggle, this community tried to deny. Thus, since the era of Shri Ram till today the charecter of this community is found negative. In this situation the question still remains that if Ravan was not that type the way he is described then why was the need to change his charecter was there ?
01/10/09 khabar-O-Nazar by Parwaaz Rahmani, sehrozaDAWAT, translated by: Ibrahim Shaikh

1 comment: