Quick question : Why did Rama ask Sita to go through Agnipariksha.
Doesnt that show lack of trust and lack of confidence on part of Rama. Arent these two emotions too 'human' to suite Rama
Printable View
Quick question : Why did Rama ask Sita to go through Agnipariksha.
Doesnt that show lack of trust and lack of confidence on part of Rama. Arent these two emotions too 'human' to suite Rama
Sandeep
HariKrishnan Sir is writing a detailed article in chennaionline about agnipareeksha.He had given the link somewhere in previous pages.You can follow that.
Rama is human.If he has not been human, he would have never been able to kill Ravana.Ravana was protected by a boon from Brahma that Devas,Gods,rakshashas should not kill him.He considered humans too puny.So, Vishnu took avatar as a human being to use this loophole and finish off the demon Ravana.
Sorry I came in too late :(
Slowly reading through the earlier post. Should reach with you guys soon.
No No I don'tthink so, viggop anNe, Ravana was Shiva Bahktha , it was Maheshwar who granted the boon, that Ravana was an amarn, and as Ravana's mind was full of ego and greed, he 4got to mention humans in whild he was requesting a boon from Maha IswarQuote:
Originally Posted by viggop
There is place in Sri Lanka, eastern Sri Lanka,wher it has 7 fountain like wells, which was according to vedic scriptures were made by Ravana by splitting the earth with his mighty sword, i think it is called 'Ravana Neerootru' .
Can some one, esp lankan friends clarify these?
Raghu
Ravana got the boon from Brahma,not Shiva. He became devoitee of Shiva later.He was so arrogant that he once asked "Who is Shankara".
will tell u the story.He went to Himalayas,fought with his half-brother Kubera,abrogated the flying chariot and was returning from Himalayas.He has about to crossover Mt.Kailash.Nandi came and stopped him and asked him to around Kailash instead of above it as Lord Shiva and Parvathi were playing with each other.The arrogant Ravana cried out to Nandi - "Who is Shankara" and refused to circumbulate Kailash.He asked Nandi to ask Shiva to come to a fight with him.It was only now that Ravana shook the entire Himalayas to show his power to Lord Shiva.
Parvathi got frightened and hug Shiva saying "My Lord, the mountain is shaking". Only, then, SHiva put his toe down and this arrogant fellow could do nothing.He was in this state for so many years lifting up himalayas under weight of Shiva's toe.Then, under advice of vibishana and maricha, he prays to Lord SHiva to relieve him of the pain ask starts singing hosanas to Shiva.Only, after that the Lord lets him go with his arrogance quelled.Ravana means "one who wailed loudly" in Sanskrit.He got this name only during this incident because he wailed loudly and cried because he could not bear Shiva's toe.Only after this, Shiva granted him a boon of long life and granted some weapons to Ravana.He then proudly boasted his name was "ravana" to everyone after this incodent with Shiva.
So, the first boon was granted to him by Brahma only.
The above story, i read from Harikrishnan sir's chennaionline series.
It must be of interest to know that Valmiki does NOT portray Ravana as a Shiva bhakta. Not a single line exists in the epic to that effect, excepting for the incident of Ravana's lifting of Mount Kailash and getting stuck underneath, when he sings His praise and obtains the boon of protection from various beings, excepting humans and monkeys, and Shiva's sword, Chandrahasa.
As for Kamban, there is only one verse in the entire epic - when Ravana leaves for the last war - which says that he performed Shiva Puja.
On the contrary, there are a number of verses in Kamban, where Ravana speaks lightly of - even scoffs and mocks at - Shiva. I would be happy if someone can come up with textual evidence to the effect that Ravana was a Shiva bhakta.
Ravana was granted longevity and NOT 'amarathvam' or 'chiranjeevithvam.' If one goes to the Uttara Kanda, one can see Ravana performing penance to Brahma, asking for 'amarathvam' and Brahma denying it to him. On the other hand, Vibishana gets it unasked.Quote:
Originally Posted by Raghu
Longevity is of course too long a period of time. When Rama shot his final arrow on Ravana, Kamban says it wiped that longevity clean, making all the boons void.
Ó째¡Ê Å¡ú¿¡Ùõ, ÓÂýÚ¨¼Â ¦ÀÕó¾ÅÓõ, Ó¾øÅý Óý¿¡û,
'±ì §¸¡Ê¡áÖõ ¦ÅÄôÀ¼¡ö' ±Éì ¦¸¡Îò¾ ÅÃÓõ, ²¨Éò
¾¢ì§¸¡Îõ ¯ÄÌ «¨ÉòÐõ ¦ºÕì ¸¼ó¾ Ò ÅÄ¢Ôõ, ¾¢ýÚ, Á¡÷À¢ø
ÒìÌ µÊ ¯Â¢÷ ÀÕ¸¢, ÒÈõ §À¡Â¢üÚ, þá¸Åý ¾ý ÒÉ¢¾ Å¡Ç¢.
'mukkOdi vAz nAL' is a life time of 3,00,00,000 years. But nonetheless limited to that. 'amarathvam' is different. There are only seven 'chiranjeevis' or persons blessed with 'chiranjeevithvam.'
(1) Aswatthama, (2) Maha Bali, (3) Vyasa, (4) Hanuman, (5) Vibishana, (6) Kripacharya, (7) Parasurama.
I thought that Markendeyan was also a chiranjeevi.
Also, there is supposed to be a sanskrit slokam on Lord Shiva which is supposed to be very powerful.It was created by Ravana.In the north, i think there is a lake near Manasarovar lake known as Ravan's lake.The people there believe that you'll die if you drink water from it as Ravana worshipped Lord Shiva there!
You are right. On seeing your response, I verified the Abithana Chintamani. It gives two different lists of seven 'chiranjeevis.' Against the definition of the head word 'chiranjeevi,' this encylopaedia of Tamil literature gives the names of the persons that I have quoted above.Quote:
Originally Posted by viggop
However, there is an appendix by name, 'thogai'. This appendix gives details of a group/set which goes by a certain number. That is to say, what are the two eclipses, the three sastras, the three fires, the four upAyas, the five Dhevas, five Dhoopas, etc. There, while defining the Seven Chiranjeevis, the following names are found:
(1) Aswatthama, (2) Maha Bali, (3) Vyasa, (4) Hanuamn, (5) Vibishana, (6) Markandeya, and (7) Parasurama. The name of Kripacharya is absent here.
I do not remember having seen the name of Kripacharya as a Chiranjeevi in Mahabharata. What I quoted above was from memory of an earlier reference to Abitana Chintamani, some time ago. However, my reading of Kisari Mohan Ganguli's translation of Vyasa Bharata is a continuing effort. I may come across a reference to Kripacharya as a Chiranjeevi. If this is found, I will give a reference.
There are two different things. One is based on oral tradition and Sthala Puranas. The other is going strictly by what the Text (of the original author and vazi-nUl-aasiriyar/s) says.Quote:
Also, there is supposed to be a sanskrit slokam on Lord Shiva which is supposed to be very powerful.It was created by Ravana.In the north, i think there is a lake near Manasarovar lake known as Ravan's lake.The people there believe that you'll die if you drink water from it as Ravana worshipped Lord Shiva there!
The stories of Rama's worship of Shiva/Shivalinga, at places like Rameshwaram, Kumbakonam etc. are all based on oral tradition and Sthala Puranas, which do have a mark of their own in their respective places. But, these cannot go to assay any particular character. The stories of Ravana's Shiva Bhakti belong to this category. One may say that Ravana was a Shiva Bhakta, according to oral tradition or Sthala Puranas. But this cannot be considered as part of the way in which the character has been constructed by the poets. A serious study cannot admit this, without evidence from the Text.
The one quoted by you falls under this category too. There is no reference anywhere in the epic, either in Valmiki or Kamban to this effect.
This is not to deny the belief/faith in oral tradition. My observations are limited to the main core of the Text and not beyond.
Quote:
Originally Posted by viggop
A) Ashwathama Balirvyaso Hanumanscha Vibheeshanaha Kripaphparsuhramascha Sapthaithey Chiranjeevinaha is a popular shloka, though i am not sure of the source, which talks of Kripa as one of the Chiranjeevis!
B) The Shivatandava Stotram: was composed by Ravana in praise of Shiva. The metre and the syllables give off an impression of Power! Consider the beginning:
Jatatavigalajjala pravahapavitasthale
Galeavalambya lambitam bhujangatungamalikam
Damad damad damaddama ninadavadamarvayam
Chakara chandtandavam tanotu nah shivah shivam .
That it is composed by Ravana is known by the last shloka, which is the phalashruti.
Pujavasanasamaye dashavaktragitam
Yah shambhupujanaparam pathati pradoshhe
Tasya sthiram rathagajendraturangayuktam
Lakshmim sadaiva sumukhim pradadati shambhuh
Dashavaktragitam or the song composed by the 10-headed one!
Badri
is this slokam present online? I would like to hear the rendition.Supposed to be a very powerful slokam.
There is one more Chiranjeevi who acts in Telugu films and makes crores ;-) .Just a joke.Sorry for digression!
Another interesting phase in Ramayana is Parashurama’s meeting with Rama… Actually Parashurama was another incarnation of Vishu and the previous one of Rama… I wonder why he could not recognise his next avatar… and almost had head on with Rama.. after Rama was coming from his wedding…
Or probably this incident was necessary for Parasurama to hand over the batton to Rama… to protect the world…
Another interesting aspect , in my opinion is… the character Valee…. If one reads Ramayana… without the Valee episode.. still it remains as Ramayana… I mean.. .the flow of Ramayana epic will in no way get affected even if Valee had not been there….
The only connection probably could be Rama had to meet Sugriva and seek his support to find Seetha and all other incidents followed ??
Otherwise, I don’t find any significant role of Valee having played in the flow of this great epic…
Vali will be born as the hunter in Dwapara yuga and will send the arrow which will kill Lord Krishna.The arror will hit the feet/toe but still Krishna will die.
Viggop, from where did you pick this up? :-) It would always be a nice idea to give the source along with the posts. That would make the discussions more meaningful. If there is no source, do not fail to mention that this is hearsay.Quote:
Originally Posted by viggop
The name of the hunter who shoots his arrow on the foot of Krishna is Jara. This event is described in Bhagavata. (Book Eleven, Chapter 6). Bhagavata mentions nothing about Jara's previous birth.
HariKrishnan Sir
I saw that in one of the TV serials(not ramanand sagar's first version).In it,after Rama shoots the arrow at Valee, he'll whisper this in Vali's ear. :oops:
Parasurama's term on earth extends to the period of Mahabaratha. He is the guru of Bhishma. Parasurama is quite aware of the purpose of this incarnation of Rama and it was his sole purpose to hand over the bow - Narayana dhanus (and not Kodhanda, which is a general name for a bow) - in meeting Rama on his way back from Mithila.Quote:
Originally Posted by S.Balaji
He does not challenge Rama for a one-on-one. He wants to test his prowess with the Narayana Dhanus. That's all.
Two or more Avatars could walk the earth at the same time. What is not possible for the Supreme! One cannot think that the Vaikunda was vacant when Rama was here. He is there; He is here and He is everywhere. :-)
These are oral traditions. Let's respect them. But not to be found in the Texts of the Masters.Quote:
Originally Posted by viggop
Yes. You are right. Nothing much would be lost if Vali is eliminated from the story. The Ramayana (and of course the Mahabaratha) was in part, history. I do believe this. Otherwise, it is not possible to bring the play of characters with such perfection, and exactitude. Take a look at the characters, or the geographical marks. Simply stupendous. A person sitting at the other end of this vast continent, giving accurrate geographical details of the country till the tip of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by S.Balaji
Therefore, Valmiki has recorded what has happened. If at all he thought so, he could have easily omitted this portion and brought about this turn of events as a dramatist.
"... What a two men show going on here? Where are all the others?
You are simply boring! There is nothing to attract any other hubbers. Why don't you exchange your tel. no. and chat or praise each other from the Dawn to Dusk?..."
From Bad Boy's Great Deutschlandia
I was under the impression that only during vedic period and in the puranas, Devas and ASURAS existed... Now I realise that I am wrong...Quote:
Originally Posted by googolplex
Sorry about it googoplex. I had difficulties in India in accessing Forumhub and could do so only now. I answered all the posts, which I normally do. If the hubbers feel that this is a 'two men show' of which I am a part, bye. If I spend this time somewhere else, I get paid for it. Thanks, anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by googolplex
Dear HariKrishnan Sir
Please do not go away.I think lot of other people will view these threads.They need not necessarily participate in it.Anyway, lot of young people like me are interested to know more about our religion,holy books and our literature.Please continue your work here.
you have mentioned that Valmiki gave exact description of each place in India.But the time scales for yuga etc. do not match our current scientific facts.So, probably we can say these events happened recently? (say 5000 years ago?)
The concept of time has to be understood in the way they stated. What they followed during the time of Mahabaratha was a year with 360 days cyccle. Bhishma refers to this and says, there are in actuality five more days to a year.Quote:
Originally Posted by viggop
Time is a very relative term. This needs to be understood. I have been grappling with the notions in the epic on this asspect. Let me first be clear about what it is,before I can say anything. :-)
In fact Valluvar says
nAl endru ondru pOl kAtti uyir Irum
vAl adhu uNarvArp perin.
Time does not exist in reality. It is only a concept. That's how Parimelazagar interprets it. Space is that which exists between any two objects. Time is the space between any two events, measured in terms of the movement of earth around the sun. Just try to remove your mind beyond the Solar system. And think of a time scale, measure and length, in the absence of sun.
It is a very vast subject. Hope I am blessed with a little understanding, soon.
*** Digression ***
Dear Hari Krishnan & others,
googolplex is our erstwhile Bad Boy reincarnated. In case you don't know him, he is the recipient of 'Most booted-out hubber' award. Here's the nomination he had:
Pls ignore him.Quote:
Well, no guesses for who gets booted out the most by the Mods, right????
Just can't figure out you know who sometimes???? What on earth triggers off this kind of animosity, Pa???? Psychotropic drugs, perhaps???
He's like this little rascal of the class, who always wants to keep on needling the teacher in just how far he could goad them, I suppose!! In the end, he gets that proverbial cane, while the rest of us could only watch in sympathy!!!
*** End ***
Dear HariKrishnan Sir
There is something in physics related to this space-time thing.I read this in Dr.Stephen Hawking's "Brief history of time" book that massive stellar objects like blackholes can bend the space and time because of their gravitational pull.
Brief History of Time is sleeping in my almirah after a first reading, for about ten years now. :-) No time to go through the history of time. :))
Few songs sung by MS for this Ramanayana thread.Good Music always brings bliss.
Bhavayami Raghuramam by Swathi Thirunal
Lyrics :- http://www.geocities.com/promiserani2/c1001.html
Listen
http://www.musicindiaonline.com/p/x/...9F9.As1NMvHdW/
Nama Ramayanam by Lakshmanacharyar
http://www.musicindiaonline.com/p/x/...EXS.As1NMvHdW/
Exactly... And further we have to note our Friend cum Administrator, Mr. RR 's Comments.Quote:
Originally Posted by S.Balaji
Dear Mr HARIKRISHNAN and Others,
Please don't get discouraged or demotivated by such loose comments from some stray elements and jealous persons who do not know how to avail the rare advantage of Fragrance of Applied-Wisdom and Beneficial Knowledge .
I am one of many who enjoy reading the rich postings of Mr. Hari quite interesting,. alongside the matching responses from others
Please continue... in the same Healthy-Spirit on our Heritage.-Treasure.
There is no basis for this Story of Rebirth of Vali to kill Krishna by Vengeance.. It cannot be true because....Quote:
Originally Posted by viggop
(1) Vali got Moksha by the grace of Lord Rama... which means NO RE-BIRTH at all, further..
(2) For all the Criticisms, Blames and Questions by Vali to Rama,... he got detailed justifications and due Replies from the Lord... on which he realised his folly and repeanted for his grave misdeeds, especially the worst injustice to his own brother Sugreeva. Then he apologises to the Innocent-victim, his younger Brother. And also hands over his Son Angatha to Sugreeva's care.
Accepting Vali's Apologies and Self-Surrender with a Guilty-conscience, Rama granted Moksha to him out of Mercy..
Then the Question of Vengeance does not arise at all... calling for Rebirth to appease the Vali's alleged Wrath on God. .
Vali's episode ends with Ramayana itself... with NO EXTENSION of term... beyond..
The Hunter "Jara" innocently killed Lord Krishna, similar to Dasaratha's hiiting by an Arrow on Sravana-Kumara... just on the spur of Surmise or Guess.
And further... an interesting point ... Who was Vali?...
...Was he dispensable for Ramayana... as a REDUNDANT-CHARACTER?
No.. Vali was one of the IMPORTANT-CHARACTERS .. INDISPENSABLE for Ramayana.
How ?...I will reply after hearing from others.
That was the most beautiful insight I have heard on why Vali could not have been Jara, the hunter. Thank you Mr Sudhaama!
Other stories I have heard why he cannot be Jara include the fact that Vali was Indra-amsa while Sugriva was Surya-amsa. As though to make amends for what happened in Ramayana, Krishna was close to Arjuna who was Indra-amsa and not to the Surya-amsa, Karna!
Again, sometimes, all this is forced logic! But Sudhaama's explanation beats everything by its sheer beauty and meaning!
Thanks Mr.Sudhaama.In Kamba Ramayanam, Vali first accuses Rama for killing him unfairly.Rama then gives a detailed explanation on why he should be punished.I think HariKrishnan Sir has listed 7 reasons in his articles.Vali accepts Rama's reasoning and asks Rama to take care of his son Angada.
i'm not able to find an answer why Vali was indispensable to Ramayana.Meeting Sugriva got Lord Rama, Hanuman and the monkey army.Sugirva gave this support if Lord Rama kills Vali.But, I think the Lord would have killed Ravana without anybody's help too.
Sudhaama Sir
Please do not keep the suspense for a long time. :-)
VALI the INDISPENSABLE Character of Ramayana.. alongwith Sugreeva and Hanuman.
Thanks to Mr. Badri, Mr. Viggop and others...Mr. Badri has presented his points beautifully...
And... further to my previous statement on the matter... here is my clarification...
(1) The object of Ramawathara was not to make Seetha get caught and then retrieve her BY ANY MEANS... But... "Sishta-Paripalanam - Dhushta-Nigraham" (Protecting the Good alongside Destroying the Evils).
One of such evils to be destroyed was Vali.... and one of the Goods whose interests were to be protected, was Sugreeva (alongwith his Minister Hanuman and others) Sugreeva was the most aggrieved due the Evil-domination by his own brother. Rama's gesture of making friendship with Sugreeva was not in consideration of his comparative-strength vs his enemy Vali's. But to get two Mangoes with One strike.... of Royal- approach... Supporting the Good alongside destroying the Evils.
(2) Vali was the God Indra, while his brother Sugreeva was the God Soorya .. by reincarnation. Since Indra could not bear the extreme onslaughts of atrocities by Ravana on him and the Deva-lokam on the whole, he prayed to God Brahma and got the Awathara as Vali bestowed with unparallel might... to gain half of the magnitude of any of his opponents Fighting-might.
Thus it was contemplated that Ravana the worst Enemy of Indra, can be destroyed, only by means of such a Superlative-supplementation of might, inevitable to combat the Tyrannical Ravana considered invincible till then.
Since Ravana's cruelties extended towards Navagrahas too, the Lord Soorya came forward to support Indra on his Noble-mission.... and so was given awathara as Vali's brother.
If Vali would have sincerely carried out his duties towards the purpose of Reincarnation on Earth...by putting an end to Ravana's evil deeds.. Rama need not have taken awathara at all just for destroying Ravana, but could have restricted with his Sishta-paripalanam only.
(3) Indra in the shape of Vali, not only failed in his Mission-duty and personal commitment, but also caused the situation to aggravate by adding insults to the injury.... since he became Ravana's Friend.
Thus Vali not only added more Gravity to the erstwhile magnitude of the Evils ... but also supplemented his misdeeds by exercising Evils himself by forcible acquiring his brothers wife as well as the rightful share of Kingdom.... that too being the so called God, in another form.
So Rama had to treat Vali as undeserving to stand face to face with Him, thus denying equal status as a Royal-enemy..... and deemed him at par with any Wild-Animal, which is only hunted. ..
In that aspect Ravana was better-qualified to be combated in the Battlefiled ... because he was a Wicked-Ruler who behaved wicked. But he too had some bright sides., even though he was not an Awathara unlike Vali.
Whereas Vali. performed towards the opposite direction, misusing all his mights and rare opportunities provided in his own interests and duties as Indra for Him and Devas sake... But what resulted?...An injustice to His subjects too.
(4) This Reverse-action of Indra in the shape of Vali, also tantamounts to Breach of Trust to Soorya, his Friend...who became the innocent victim of his God-brother's atrocities..
(5) As offered by Vali, if Rama would have sought his support ... no doubt Seetha could have been retrieved, by means of the intervention of Vali. Then the name Ramayana would have been corrected as Valiyayana... and Rama would have been called as the Supporter of Evils...
Gaining Victory with the support of Evils is suicidal. It indirectly means the encouragement of Evils and self-weakening of the Postive-might of Nobles.
(6) If Vali was left apart in Ramayana unaffected by Rama's birth, .. then the Gospel...
Parithraanaaya Saadhoonaam, Vinaasaaya cha Dhushkrithaam
Dharma-Samsthaapanaarthaaya Sambhavaami Yugae Yugae...
... would have become meaningless... and futile.
(7) Irrespective of God's relevance in the epic... it cannot be the Right-objective nor the Healthy- approach of Rama,... to seek the support of Vali, just because of his greater might than Sugreeva, as also his Powerful-Voice with Ravana.
If so resorted, Rama the Embodiment of Noble-Character . would have lost his Golden-image..as also the Glory of this Epic itself would have got decimated. ... because of such a Negative approach... and Sickly Principle
Ramayana conveying a Valuable Human- message, as a Remarkable- Lesson for the posterity, can never set such a bad- precedence ... contrary to the Principles of Righteousness. .
(8) By means of Vali's character... Rama has proved to the Mankind... that...
(a) Alongwith the Personal- Commitments, Duties of the Seat one occupies, are the primary consideration, more than any Individuals- interests ...
(b) If anyone turns as an Evil-force, he is considered as an Opponent to Dharma (Righteousness)...as also the Enemy to Supreme God... the Ultimate-Protector . Nobody including a King or even Gods can be an exception ...
(c) Added to Selfish-motives, if someone becomes wicked too, .he begets the worst punishment...especially when he is meant for implementing the Righteousness. on the field.
Strictly speaking, Vali deserves Naraka, the Hell... But he was so lucky to gain the Merciful Grace of Rama...as to be bestowed Moksha / Mukthi.
(9) In consideration of Ravana's Varam (Boon) .... excluding Monkeys and Mankind ... Sugreeva along with his Monkey-force was needed for Rama... the Human-birth.
Besides there can be no Ramayana without Hanuman... who was so Humble and Dutiful... a Symbolic-character sincerely practicing Dharma
Thus Rama has also proved to humanity that God can take any shape and take the support of anybody and make him / her great... if only Dharma is adhered to.
In brief, the message behind Ramayana, is ... that God works for the Success and Prosperity of Righteous-minded noble persons... more than towards His own Fame.
To accentuate the Values of Daylight ... Dark nights also are needed
To show the Worth of the Shady-shelter... Hot Sun also is needed
To show in practice to Mankind... by translating God's words into action...
... Vali, Sugreeva and Hanuman are also the Indispensable and IMPORTANT Characters of Ramayana.
Sugreeva seeks protection under Rama.Saranagathi.Lord Rama has to protect him. Just a doubt. If an evil man like Ravana seeks Saranagathi under Rama, then Rama will be forced to protect him.But, can a person still continue to be evil after surrendering himself to the Lord?Or the act of saranagathi means losing individual ego and hence no can be evil after that?
Viggop..Quote:
Originally Posted by viggop
Enna marandhuteengalaa..... Endru poi naalai vaa...... Ravana .. during the intial stages of the war itself will have a head on with Rama and will be almost defeated ... and will be armless and tired..... Rama will gracefully tell him to go back and come back fresh the next for the war.......
Can you imagine any other person could have done that.... Only Rama can do such remarkable things .....
If Ravana had sought Saranaagadhi at that time... he would have survived.... but his character was bound for death ... I suppose.... else he would have become a timid character.....
Hi Balaji
My questions was more towards the meaning of "saranagathi"? Can a person be evil after surrendering himself to God? does "saranagathi" means losing an individual ego?
Good observations, Sudhaama. A few points from my side. I will elaborate these later. I have been posponing participaton in the Epics thread because of health reasons. I will give a few quick observations for now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sudhaama
Rama, if at all his intention was to retrieve Sita, if it was his only consideration, should in all appropiatness have sought the friendship of Vali alone. Vali draws the attention of Rama to this point when he says.
'¦ºÂ¨Äî ¦ºüÈ À¨¸ ¦¾ÚÅ¡ý ¦¾Ã¢óÐ,
«Â¨Äô ÀüÈ¢ò Ш½ «¨Áó¾¡ö ±É¢ý,
Ò¨Äô ÀüÚõ «ô ¦À¡íÌ «Ã¢ §À¡ì¸¢, µ÷
Ó¨Äô ÀüÚÅÐ ±ýÉ ÓÂüº¢§Â¡?
'¦ºÂ¨Äî ¦ºüÈ À¨¸ Ravana took Sita away by force. He nullified your acts, your act of protecting her. ¦¾ÚÅ¡ý ¦¾Ã¢óÐ, «Â¨Äô ÀüÈ¢ò Ш½ «¨Áó¾¡ö ±É¢ý, if you intended to seek the friendship of Sugriva, in order to help you rout him,
Ò¨Äô ÀüÚõ «ô ¦À¡íÌ «Ã¢ §À¡ì¸¢, then you should have come to me, the lion who is capable of killing an elephant (The word 'puyal' here stands for an elephont) µ÷ Ó¨Äô ÀüÚÅÐ ±ýÉ ÓÂüº¢§Â¡? Instead, you have sought the ally of a rabbit. What kind of an effort is this!
Vali was the king. He had all the wherewithal with him to fight the demon. Apart from the infrastural considerations, he had the track record of quelling Ravana. Therefore, he makes an ideal choice, if it was Rama's sole purpose to retrieve Sita from the prison of Ravana.
But it is more than obvious that Rama's intention did not end there. Apart from this, take a look at the advice of Kabandha, at the time of his being killed and appearing in his etheral form, and at the advice of Sabari. Both tell Rama that it is Sugriva with whom he has to join hands to accomplish his purpose. One has to see why both Kabandha and Sabari told Rama to seek the friendship of Sugriva, and make him the king.
You may like to see the following ariticles of mine, in this respect:
Who can be the perfect ally - Part I
http://www.chennaionline.com/festiva...eligion228.asp
Who can be the perfect ally - Part II
http://www.chennaionline.com/festiva...eligion229.asp
There are 64 instalments on the Vali Episode, commencing from
The Vali Episode
http://www.chennaionline.com/festiva...eligion227.asp
Vali was the son of Indra. Not Indra himself. Similarly, Sugriva was the son of Sun.Quote:
(2) Vali was the God Indra, while his brother Sugreeva was the God Soorya .. by reincarnation. Since Indra could not bear the extreme onslaughts of atrocities by Ravana on him and the Deva-lokam on the whole, he prayed to God Brahma and got the Awathara as Vali bestowed with unparallel might... to gain half of the magnitude of any of his opponents Fighting-might.
Another thing. That Vali received half-the strength of his opponent is a myth. Though Kamban mentions this aspect, This has to be gone into.
The necklace of Indra, which is supposed to bring half-the strength of his opponent, is handed over to Sugriva at the time of Vali's death. Logically speaking, Sugriva, who now wears the necklace, should have gained that mystic power endowed by the necklace. This did not happen.
This theory is not supported by Valmiki. Kamban's Hanuman says that Vali is capable of getting half the power of his opponent. This has nothing to do with the decision of Rama to kill him from hiding.
I have argued the case in my ChennaiOnline column. This can be found in the above 64 instalments which I have indicated.
It is plausible. But not possible. Is there any textual evidence to this effect?Quote:
Since Ravana's cruelties extended towards Navagrahas too, the Lord Soorya came forward to support Indra on his Noble-mission.... and so was given awathara as Vali's brother.
It was beyond Vali. He chose to strike friendship with Ravana instead. Though Vali was powerful enough to meet Ravana, he did not choose to do so.Quote:
If Vali would have sincerely carried out his duties towards the purpose of Reincarnation on Earth...by putting an end to Ravana's evil deeds.. Rama need not have taken awathara at all just for destroying Ravana, but could have restricted with his Sishta-paripalanam only.
True, in part. Once again, Vali was Indra's son. Not Indra himself.Quote:
(3) Indra in the shape of Vali, not only failed in his Mission-duty and personal commitment, but also caused the situation to aggravate by adding insults to the injury.... since he became Ravana's Friend.
True. This forms the part of the justifications that Rama gives Vali, which Vali gets convinced, and accepts.Quote:
Thus Vali not only added more Gravity to the erstwhile magnitude of the Evils ... but also supplemented his misdeeds by exercising Evils himself by forcible acquiring his brothers wife as well as the rightful share of Kingdom.... that too being the so called God, in another form.
This question of killing from hiding needs an elaborate answer. I have tried to do so in the above ChennaiOnline articles.Quote:
So Rama had to treat Vali as undeserving to stand face to face with Him, thus denying equal status as a Royal-enemy..... and deemed him at par with any Wild-Animal, which is only hunted. ..
Vali cannot be considered to be an avatar.Quote:
In that aspect Ravana was better-qualified to be combated in the Battlefiled ... because he was a Wicked-Ruler who behaved wicked. But he too had some bright sides., even though he was not an Awathara unlike Vali.
That Vali's subjects were affected is acknowledged by Hanuman. Other points are not supported by Valmiki or Kamban.Quote:
Whereas Vali. performed towards the opposite direction, misusing all his mights and rare opportunities provided in his own interests and duties as Indra for Him and Devas sake... But what resulted?...An injustice to His subjects too.
This is another hypothesis. This does not figure in, in the Text.Quote:
(4) This Reverse-action of Indra in the shape of Vali, also tantamounts to Breach of Trust to Soorya, his Friend...who became the innocent victim of his God-brother's atrocities..
True. What Rama needed was an ally in his efforts, which extend beyond the retrieval of Sita. It was that he wanted the support from the right person. And not certainly Vali, though Rama considers him as a good king. Not a good person.Quote:
(5) As offered by Vali, if Rama would have sought his support ... no doubt Seetha could have been retrieved, by means of the intervention of Vali. Then the name Ramayana would have been corrected as Valiyayana... and Rama would have been called as the Supporter of Evils...
I need to think over this point.Quote:
(6) If Vali was left apart in Ramayana unaffected by Rama's birth, .. then the Gospel...
Parithraanaaya Saadhoonaam, Vinaasaaya cha Dhushkrithaam
Dharma-Samsthaapanaarthaaya Sambhavaami Yugae Yugae...
... would have become meaningless... and futile.
This has already been acknowledged.Quote:
(7) Irrespective of God's relevance in the epic... it cannot be the Right-objective nor the Healthy- approach of Rama,... to seek the support of Vali, just because of his greater might than Sugreeva, as also his Powerful-Voice with Ravana.
I agree. But it is not right to say that Rama would have lost his 'golden-image', as that would show Rama more as an image-conscious person, rather than a Dharma-conscious person.Quote:
If so resorted, Rama the Embodiment of Noble-Character . would have lost his Golden-image..as also the Glory of this Epic itself would have got decimated. ... because of such a Negative approach... and Sickly Principle.
As for the other points, I will join a little later. Running a temperature. Unable to sit, read or type any more.
Dear HariKrishnan Sir
Take rest.Eagerly awaiting your update in MahaBharatha thread on duryodhana's ascent to heaven once you come back.
I wonder why Sugriva did not use Hanuman to fight Valee…. After all Hanuman is all powerful and mighty …..
Besides, Hanuman is not an ordinary person to run away and go along with Sugriva…. To be away from the crutches of Valee……though he played a supportive role to Sugriva…
Any reason for this ….