The expose of claim of so-called scientific historicity of a Twitterati Manasataramgini that Ṛṣyaśṛṅga was biological father of Rāma and his three brothers.The problem with many so-called interpretation experts, be a Rightist, be a Leftist, be a Centrist or whatsoever, is that they do not read the original text with the detached dedication it demands. They project their own prejudices, their half cooked sense of justification, their twisted western education and so-called study of Śāstra-s. They interpret Itihāsa as history and do blunders. They can be good novelists but are worthless as guides for understanding the Śāstra-s. Coming to the point:
The Indian tradition was never shy of recording sexual behaviour and out of custom births of great seers and Rājanya-s. To quote a few, birth of Vasiṣṭha and Agastya, birth of Dīrghatamā, birth of Kauravas' and Pānḍavas' fathers.
So, if Ṛṣyaśṛṅga was biological father of Rāma and his three brothers, as claimed by this fiction expert, it would have been recorded. Niyoga was an accepted way of getting progeny. The tradition has not been shy of even recording the episode of illicit relationship of Candra with Tārā, wife of his Guru Bṛhaspati. Even a son named Budha was born and when questioned who was the biological father, Tārā answered that to be Candra.
In olden days, a child born out of illicit relationship was treated as son of the husband of his/her mother and not his biological father. It is obvious that there was no need of ‘hiding’ or ‘camouflaging’ such things and they used to express truthfully. Had it happened, there was no need of hiding in the case of birth of Rāma too. Had the Niyoga been organized, it would have been recorded. Our tradition is not that prone to falsehood.
So, the claim that Ṛṣyaśṛṅga was biological father of Rāma and his three brothers is just a wild flight of an egoist mind in the arena called PURE IMAGINATION and should be countered or ignored better.
Now, what was the truth? It is there in the text itself. Ṛṣyaśṛṅga does Putreṣṭi Yajñna in Atharvaṇa tradition. Atharvaśirasa deals with the herbs and medicines too:
इष्टिं तेऽहं करिष्यामि पुत्रीयां पुत्रकारणात्।
अथर्वशिरसि प्रोक्तैर्मन्त्रै: सिद्धां विधानत:॥
It was to invigor old Daśaratha and Kauśalyā probably who might be nearing menopause due to her age. It should be noted that the whole process of Aśvamedha and Putreṣṭi continued for more than two years! Aśvamedha itself is a yearlong invigorating process, be it for mental and physical strength of the Yajamāna king or for his realm. Daśaratha performed Aśvamedha before Putreṣṭi Yajña.
The Śloka-s are given here chronologically:
तत: काले बहुतिथे कस्मिंश्चित सुमनोहरे।
वसन्ते समनुप्राप्ते राज्ञो यष्टुं मनोऽभवत्॥
...
पुन: प्राप्ते वसन्ते तु पूर्ण: संवत्सरोऽभवत्।
प्रसवार्थं गतो यष्टुं हयमेधेन वीर्यवान्॥
...
अथ संवत्सरे पूर्णे तस्मिन् प्राप्ते तुरङ्गमे।
सरय्वाश्चोत्तरे तीरे राज्ञो यज्ञोऽभ्यवर्तत॥
The returning of Ṛṣyaśṛṅga to his place with his wife Śāntā is recorded after the Yajñna is finished:
शान्तया प्रयतौ सार्धमृष्यशृङ्ग: सुपूजित:। अनुगम्यमानो राज्ञा च सानुयात्रेण धीमता॥
And after that, most important of the all:
ततो यज्ञे समाप्ते तु ऋतूनां षट् समत्ययु:। ततश्च द्वादशे मासे चैत्रे नावमिके तिथौ॥
Six Ṛtu-s and twelve months elapsed after the Yajña was over, then in the month of Caitra on ninth Tithi, Rāma was born.
A human child takes birth after nine months of conception, not after twelve months. For Ṛṣyaśṛṅga to be biological father of Rāma and all, he should have stayed three more months after the Yajñna was over but he went back to his abode immediately after it. As per Śāstrīya injunctions also, he was to return immediately after taking Dakṣinā etc.
If you look into the divine aspect, queens conceived after taking Yājñika Pāyasaṃ but that will not be acceptable to this moron.
It is there in the text itself that proves Daśaratha only to be biological father of all his four sons, from pure human perspective.
