Rama before Krishna- timeline

[Madhuri]

Do some people think that Krishna existed on Earth prior to Rama? I was reading the first chapter of BG and read this text:

At that time Arjuna, the son of Pāṇḍu, seated in the chariot bearing the flag marked with Hanumān, took up his bow and prepared to shoot his arrows.

I've come across sources that state that Rama must have existed after Krishna or that the story of Rama came after the Mahabharata.

Is that just an example of non-Hindus speculating about our religion and history and trying to mask it as fact?

 

[Bob Dixon]

Is that just an example of non-Hindus speculating about our religion and history and trying to mask it as fact?

If it makes you feel any better, I, as a non-Hindu, have never heard of such a thing.
I was always told that the order was Parashurama, then Rama, and THEN Krishna.

But maybe some people really do think otherwise.

 

[Madhuri]

But maybe some people really do think otherwise.

I've read it in numerous sources, text book and internet.
It becomes frustrating though, when I read about my religion in a formal context and find all this information that contradicts my beliefs, but the sources never seem to explain their foundations. So I don't know why those sources come to the conclusion that Rama existed prior to Krishna. It baffles me!

 

[A-ManESL]

Can you post any of the sources which say that Rama came after Krishna?

In the Mahabharata I have seen references to Rama directly as well. There was the admonishment of Yudhishtra (if I remember correctly) by a sage to his complaint that 13 years in the jungle was a long time and no one had suffered so much before. The sage told him the story of Rama. On another occasion Hanuman actually comes across Arjuna and Arjuna ends up chanting the name of Rama and Krishna both. (I have lent my copy of the Mahabharata to someone or I would give you exact details.)

 

[Gaura Priya]

The other problem of confusion may be that there are different Ramas... Lord Balarama, Lord Parashurama, and Lord Ramachandra. Each of them are called Rama in short, and that can be confusing sometimes.

I was always taught that the incarnation of Lord Ramachandra was, well, quite literally, millions of years ago. Lord Parashurama came a little after, and then Lord Balarama and Lord Krishna.

 

[Jainarayan]

The other problem of confusion may be that there are different Ramas... Lord Balarama, Lord Parashurama, and Lord Ramachandra. Each of them are called Rama in short, and that can be confusing sometimes.

I was always taught that the incarnation of Lord Ramachandra was, well, quite literally, millions of years ago. Lord Parashurama came a little after, and then Lord Balarama and Lord Krishna.

Yes, a couple of Ramas. Lord Balarama is Lord Krishna's older brother. And I read that Lord Ramachandra came just a few thousand years before Lord Krishna. And that Lord Ramachandra and Lord Parashurama were co-eval. Lord Parashurama got a bit uppity with Lord Ramachandra in a duel, but paid obeisance to Lord Ramachandra when He bested Lord Parashurama, who left the world of men, to retire to seclusion and is one of the Chiranjivins.

I wish the sages would get all on the same page!

 

[Gaura Priya]

Heheh... I have to say though, that Lord Parashurama was one of the bloodier incarnations of Krishna I know. With His axe and His attempt to kill all the fallen and corrupted kshatriyas, I am not surprised that Lord Raghava and Parashurama duelled it out.

And Lord Balarama is just oober cool... I love the pastime with Him and getting intoxicated with the Varuni wine. What a guy!

 

[Jainarayan]

Wikipedia shows this rendition of Lord Parashurama.

Would it be blasphemy to say "hubba hubba woof!"?

 

[Gaura Priya]

Wikipedia shows this rendition of Lord Parashurama.

Would it be blasphemy to say "hubba hubba woof!"?

Heheh, whatever your inclinations are.

I prefer Bhima, or Balarama... Actually, I think Karna's the best!

Balarama is just super cool too because He's a Wrestler, and a manifestation of God!

Jehovah God may have wrestled with one of His devotees, but in our conception... God wrestles whomever He likes, especially if we want to put Him into an armlock.

 

[Jainarayan]

I feel sorry for Bhishma. He was the archetypal tragi-hero. Duryodhana was a schmuck. In a video I saw of the TV series Mahabharata (just found it on YT Mahabharata - YouTube), episode 74, Duryodhana calls Krishna "that milkman"!

At 22:50 Krishna gives Arjuna divine vision to see Krishna's Universal Form, and at 24:00 begins to show His Universal Form. I got goosebumps!

 

[kaisersose]

I've come across sources that state that Rama must have existed after Krishna or that the story of Rama came after the Mahabharata.

Is that just an example of non-Hindus speculating about our religion and history and trying to mask it as fact?

A conspiracy theory?

I have not seen any of these stories claiming Rama came after Krishna. However, the Valmiki Ramaya available today came *after* the Mahabharata. So, though Rama was earlier than Krishna, there is no available Ramayana text that is earlier than the Mahabharata. Either it was never written down before (oral tradition), or all such copies were replaced by the later text, we now call Valmiki Ramayana.

 

[Madhuri]

A conspiracy theory?

I have not seen any of these stories claiming Rama came after Krishna. However, the Valmiki Ramaya available today came *after* the Mahabharata. So, though Rama was earlier than Krishna, there is no available Ramayana text that is earlier than the Mahabharata. Either it was never written down before (oral tradition), or all such copies were replaced by the later text, we now call Valmiki Ramayana.

Perhaps the confusion is linked to this, where authors who see that the Ramayana was written after the Mahabharata assume that it means Rama came after Krishna.

 

[kaisersose]

Perhaps the confusion is linked to this, where authors who see that the Ramayana was written after the Mahabharata assume that it means Rama came after Krishna.

The Mahabharata contains the story of Rama (Ramopakhyana). As I recall, the Pandavas are lamenting their fate of having to live in the forest and they want to know if this has happened to anyone else in the past. Janamejaya or Narada narrates the story of Rama (not mentioned as an avatar here).

So, regardless of the date of Ramayana, there should be no doubt that the story of Rama predates the Mahabharata.

 

[Riverwolf]

The Mahabharata contains the story of Rama (Ramopakhyana). As I recall, the Pandavas are lamenting their fate of having to live in the forest and they want to know if this has happened to anyone else in the past. Janamejaya or Narada narrates the story of Rama (not mentioned as an avatar here).

So, regardless of the date of Ramayana, there should be no doubt that the story of Rama predates the Mahabharata.

Or, heck, maybe that's where it came from. Maybe someone read that passage, and thought: "wow, what a good story. I shall expand on it." Happens all the time nowadays.