The launching of astra still required the use of the bow. By the word bow, we tend to understand a shape something like an elongated D. There were many different types of bows. The warriors bow was not similar to the hunter's bow. One has to remember that the hunter has to run with his bow in hand, behind his kill. The archer on foot could not carry as heavy a bow as the archer on a chariot. The shapes, the accessories, the attachments, every single detail differs. This is an on-going study. I am yet to come to any conclusions on this, especially in the absence of solid material evidence in museums. Even the weapons that lie in the museums lie unclassified.Quote:
Originally Posted by viggop
Therefore, the launching was still with the use of the bow.
When I used the word 'missile' and when I said 'launching it' and 'firing it' I did not have the ICBMs and their likes in mind. I meant that which can be fired and launched, that which can be propelled from one place to another, that which can explode, and that which can destroy a large area. When the poet says 'mUvulagum aziyum' one has to remember that the word 'ulagu' need not always mean 'world'. It could simply be a 'larger area'.
The difference between an arrow and astra («õÒõ «ò¾¢ÃÓõ) is very clearly brought out in the epics. The poets do not use the word astra when they mean an ordinary arrow and vice versa. But how was an astra made, what was it composed of, how was it propelled, etc. are questions which still remain mysterious. Because not a single 'astra' was made by anyone on earth. Every single one of them - the epics mention very clearly - were received from celestials. This is where Eric Van Daniken's theories sound valid and plausible, though they are scoffed and mocked at by a large number of researchers.
Yes. I have explained that in the article to which I have given URL. It is not Rama alone. There are so many instances in the Mahabharata, where the word 'caution' is always spoken of, when an 'astra' is handed over. Conditions are laid down as to when they are to be used. The person who receives it gets training on launching, regulating its course, including/excluding persons from its effect (this is limited only the a few astras) and withdrawing it too.Quote:
So, Rama does not use divine weapons just because he does not want to kill other people.When he used brahmaastra on Ravana,i think he must have curbed its power so that only Ravana is killed and not everyone in the battle field.
Once again, while regulating the course was possible in almost all the cases, withdrawing was possible in a few cases - like the extremely potent Brahma-astra and Brahma Siras. A few of the astras could be used just only once. Like the bombs, they burst and destroy. 'It would then return to me,' would say the bestower of the missile. Like the Naga-astra that Karna used.
I think you are speaking about the last scuffle between Aswathama and Arjuna, after the War. Yes. He charges a blade of grass with the power of (not Brahma-astra but) Brahma Siras. He did not know how to withdraw it, while Arjuna could. This was so because Aswathama had not been taught on the art of launching and withdrawing that particular astra, while Arjuna was.Quote:
In the mahabharatha, when ashwathama launches the brahmaastra against Arjuna,i think he uses the blade of grass and changes it into brahmasastra. Is this true?
The care that the Masters took, the trust that a student should gain, before the intricacies of the use of an astra could be learnt can be seen by this incident. Acharya Drona had taught the art completely (in respect of Brahma Siras) to Arjuna, while he just started, but not completed the training of his own son.
This is a very vast subject. I am still in the very preliminary stage of collecting data and evoloving ideas. And therefore I am not in a poisition to present a more rounded picture. God willing.[/quote]
