Kamasutra and Ramayana – Epics Compared

As long as individuality is a word linked with the human lexicon, every time we make comparisons, we will have to strive to make the definitions comply. The point is not that we are discussing terms or epics here; the real problem is that we are trying to compare them. How would common sanity allow the comparison of a chair and a gallon of nuclear waste? How can a person tend to compare ubiquitous logic and the Pythagorean theorem? Mundane things have an accessible prototype station that no one can make them challenge, and exploiting their accessibility is diabolical. It is equivalent to marrying for sex or buying a car just to sit. It’s rude, it’s inane, and most of all, it’s unacceptable. If we build some conduit of understanding between two epics, nothing can confirm that neither we in ours, nor the medium itself, are nullified by an inconsistent resolution. The reason for that is not that we do not dare to meet the occasion, but that the occasion is simply not affected by easy bravery, that the source of the inconsistency is not personal, but that the inconsistency is automatic, circumstantial, born of designed comparisons. greater than what we aspire to. In simpler jargon, we cannot knock down a mountain with a hammer and nail.

Comparing epics is not cumbersome, because we denote something as cumbersome if we believe that it does not withstand the possibility of being staged… comparing epics is impossible, or rather, comparison in its conception serves as a non-existent means, not uniting, not involving, not disturbing the extremes, rather moving subtly between them. We cannot devise a degree that satisfies an ideal comparison, and therefore any comparison design will remain vague, insubstantial, inexperienced, crude, unnecessary, and formless. If you still find it hard to let the fact seem credible, try comparing maps, rivers, tides, men, women, the moon and the sun, and if you are close to concluding, try the basis on which you judge, and perhaps you will understand. . how the comparison is never more than personal.

Since the abomination must be executed, it must be quick and painless, like a heart attack while one sleeps. I will endeavor to compare the bestial epics ‘Kamasutra’ and ‘Ramayana’.

Kamasutra is one of the oldest epics in India, and it is also one of its most illustrious. The only way of knowing about the Kamasutra that is not commonly known is that it was written by Mallangana Vatsyayana, around 250 AD. C., was written in Sanskrit sutras, is an epic about the Nagaraka people and is about embracing sexual pleasure. . The remarkable remainder of the Kamasutra can ideally be read serially in the celebrated graffiti scrawled on the walls of a child’s bathroom in any institutional building, or inspected with visual aids in the most popular segregated corners of it, or if all the resorts fail, then the delicate knowledge conferred by the Kamasutra can be devised at a very lucrative price in the Pallika bazaar. The Kamasutra is the Hindu sex manual. It is prone to adultery, lesbianism, open sex, illicit sex, positions that Olympic gold medalists in acrobatics will find hard to engineer, is controversially opposed to oral sex, and gleefully vilifies and belittles women into mere sex objects. funny. a degree disgusting enough to give a feminist back convulsions. In conclusion, the Kamasutra is about sex. And so, in our approach to the ensuing epic, this is the tool we’ll need to employ to stab while courting. The comparison must be based on the similarity of one facet, so what remains to be done is to prove that the Ramayana is as immensely disgusting a sexual epic as the Kamasutra.

Whether we’re in a bathroom creating dark poo or slipping off a bar of soap in a bathroom, ‘hey ram’ is a favorite exclamation point. The Ramayana is not something that one can wash their hands of a batthetic synopsis or sully themselves with brevity in a vain attempt to summarize the details, the nature of the epic, the enormity of its conception, cannot be synthesized or concentrated in a few. words. However, if desperation arouses more than reverence then: he went into the jungle with his wife and not-so-tempered brother, started a war, gathered an army of weird monkeys, one of them had a fetish for arson and beat a guy. with ten heads and a clay pot where his pancreas should have been. Rarely are there people raised in India without the autonomous fear of God, that is, Ram, without the knowledge of the Ramayana, and of course for the joyful ignorant, Doordarshan issued an entire series dedicated to the epic and still happily has reruns. airs every weekend.

Now, the comparison must be carried out. And remember the encouraging word ‘sex’.

Perception is like a trained dog. You can place it on anything and expect at least one foot to get bitten off. If we begin to perceive immorally and with a bit of iniquity, or arguably, with a sense less myopic than the archetype ingrained in our sick Indian mindsets, the Ramayana can be seen, like the Kamasutra, as a practical sex manual.

Now, arbitrary qualifications must be raised and arbitrary conclusions announced.

Since Ram’s father is a man with a stellar herd of wives, the Ramayana definitely nods not only to polygamy but also to threesomes and foursomes. Laxman’s (and even Bharat’s) longing to accompany Ram to a forest during the extended period of exile illustrates a very dirty homosexual approach. The savamvar needed Ram to break Shiva’s bow in order to ‘win’ Sita as his wife, it can be mechanized into a very apt allegory…okay imagine, Ram needs to ‘break’ a certain ‘something’ to finally ‘deflower’ to Sita. Then, in the forest, what unequivocal, precise and justified reason do Laxman and Ram have, instead of the lame one of looking for food, to leave Sita behind and go into the forest, alone, with arrows and other phallic instruments that can be used? interpreted as ‘tools to devise obscene homosexual pleasure’? Jatayu is a character tangentially consistent with the circumstances related to Sita… the word ‘Jatayu’ is a convoluted etymological contribution of the word ‘Jata’ which in common Hindi translates as ‘hair’, and therefore Valmiki, the model among perverts. , he was actually alluding to Sita’s pubic hair. Hanuman’s invasion of Lanka and the act of

These are just some of the multitudes of connotations scattered throughout the text. Through keen observations and a keener sense of the obscurities, perhaps one can gain consummate recognition of the Ramayana as an epic that not only preaches sex, but abstractly advocates a heterodox attitude.

Thus, very reluctantly, the epics lay compared.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *