Valivadh Topics List

Vali Vadh is being treated as a different chapter (as a most controversial topic) as various explanations are offered depending on readers mindset. As many people are devotee of Rama and think Rama as a god they tend to come out with different interesting explanations. But in this Blog I think the explanation has to assume Rama as a person who guides us by his actions.. Another problem in this topic is the confusion of the word justice.
Rawls develops what he claims are principles of justice through the use of an entirely and deliberately artificial device he calls the Original position in which everyone decides principles of justice from behind a veil of ignorance. This “veil” is one that essentially blinds people to all facts about themselves that might cloud what notion of justice is.
Hence we are enumerating all the important points so that one can come to an independent and logical conclusion devoid of any Bias. All the enumerated features show that Valmiki was aware of the confusion that will arise and has noted in detail the events and conversations clearly. This section collects all the points to come to a justifiable conclusion.

Why Sugriva Not Vali? To understand Vali Vadh we need to get all our data clear more
Brothers in Unison? : Either Sugriva wanted to kill Vali or Vali wanted to more
Brothers in Dissonance : The characters of Sugriva and Vali needs to be studied in detail more
With Respect to Vali? : Many find it easy to cast Vali as a villain, and explain more
Killing Vali- Motive? : The lustful Sugriva is with whom? more
Vali & Sugriva Gorillas? : Using similes about both Vali and Sugriva he uses Black clouds more
Ethical & Moral Issues in Kishkinda Kanda : Many moral & ethical issues seems to be challenging. more
What’s morals …….What’s Ethics The difference between ethics and morals is multidimensional. more
Vali’s accusations………of Rama: You are a sinner… more
आततायी (aatatayee) ……… Terrorist/Despot According to Adarvana Veda and Manusmriti Vali has to killed immediately more
Rama the …….executioner. In fact it is just open and shut case. more
With Vali Had a Magic Pendent ?They said the necklace had a magic power …more
Who is an आततायी (aatataayee)? There are six types of Aatataayee more
Srinivasa Shastry view of Valivadh….analysed Vali was killed by Rama although by a fraud..more Ethics in Bin-Laden’s and Vali’s Death a similar ethical problem on the platter – that is Bin Laden’s death.more
Criminal is not ………..a sinner!!! This could only mean a criminal ……is not incurring sin. more

                                              Back To Ramayana Topics List

55 Comments (+add yours?)

  1. Prabhat Pandey
    Jun 30, 2011 @ 19:53:21

    Respected Sir / Madam, whomso ever it may concern
    Vali Vadh is undoubtedly the most controversial incident in the history of universe as it directly effects the persanality of Maryada Purushottam, the greatest god of hindu religion, Lord Ram. It is very easy for anyone to comment upon even Lord Ram and Krishna as every individual is gifted with tongue to speak whatever they feel. To the best of my knowledge and if one goes between the lines of Ramcharitmanas, it is clearly mentioned about the situations under which Vali hunt was made by Lord Ram. Vali had a boon of gaining 50% physical power of any challenger. But Sugriv also had the advantage of Vali’s restriction in entering the Rishyamukh mountain where he had taken shelter. Ram, under 14 years of Vanvas, was not permitted to enter a city as a strict condition of Vanvas. Vali would never enter the Rishyamukh mounatin be it a challenge by Sugriv. And whenever Sugriv felt life, he straight away used to run towards Rishyamukh mountain, the only place where he was safe. All the above conditions left no choice for Lord Ram to guide Sugriv to challenge Vali, hunt him from the forest as he was not permitted to enter the Kishkindha city (a strict Vanvas condition). Now, i think i am quite clear over the subject. Further any doubts on this topic can be taken up which will be cleared on other logic because Lord Ram had no weak point on his part that is why he is the greatest god (along with Lord Krishna) of all times.

    Reply

    • Pi Laminar
      Aug 16, 2011 @ 10:46:57

      Mr Prabhat , Vali didn’t had any such boon to capture half the enemy strength , These are lies and hearsay spraed from one mouth to another . VR and Mahabharata do not give even a hint of such boon

      Reply

  2. mghariharan
    Jun 30, 2011 @ 20:55:22

    Ramacharitamans Sorry I am not competent to comment. Why kill Vali etc have to be answerted. Also like sugriva Rama can challenge vali and get him out. Read my explanation on aatataaye where Rama had to kill him immediately. Any doubts after that is welcome.

    Reply

    • Prabhat Pandey
      Jun 30, 2011 @ 21:57:10

      Respected Hariharan Sir,
      Its great to see a senior citizen has replied to statement. It felt me great to see your comments. Sir, actuallyi have not given start to this discussion. Its a reply to the created controversies going on various sites. I totally support your statement that why such issues be discussed. But, as you can see the home page of this site, it starts with the same controversy. Lord Ram need not to challenge any one because he was a global savior and his incarnation was to save the earth from the demons and devils who had overcome the humanity instead of challenging Vali and Parashuram, the supreme powers of that time. Sir, any points may please be given.

      Reply

      • mghariharan
        Jul 01, 2011 @ 22:14:35

        Ramayana and other epics are books of infinite knowledge. We are all small people trying to understand it. Every one’s effort is required to attain reasonable understanding it. Your ideas are not wrong any many people have your opinion. But if you go through my Blog I am not conceding that Rama is god, and whatever he does is hence correct. This will make reading Ramayana useless as it will not be applicable to us. Instead I own the opinion that though Rama is an avathar purash he shows us as an ordinary person how we should lead our life. We have to copy what he does by understanding. Hence the effort in this blog to explain his actions. For example if as you say Vali is stronger than Rama due to some magic etc. that does not give Rama the right to kill Vali from behind. Valmiki himself says doing it will incur the sin of killing a fetus. Vali before going to fight Sugriva says Rama will not do that sin. But Still Rama does it because he (Vali) is an Aatataayee. Assuming Rama is god will lead to many confusions in Valmiki’s explanation of the character of Rama. Another mistake in your assumption is that weak person can attack strong person from behind which is also not correct.
        Have you read any novel where hero cries. The next set of postings is going to show how Rama cries as many as 8 times in Ramayana. He is just a human being but teaches us how to become godly by his actions.

  3. Prabhat Pandey
    Jul 01, 2011 @ 23:17:01

    Respected Hariharan Sir, thanks for your reply. In my earlier comments, no where it is mentioned that Vali was stronger than Ram. I have told that Vali had a boon of gaining 50 % physical strength of his challenger. As far as individual’s physical strength is concerned, Lord Ram had proven it before Sugriv Challenged Vali by piercing 07 trees in a row which Vali could pierce only one. In my previous comments i have explained about the conditions under which Vali’s hunt was made. These situations no where show that Lord Ram is weaker and had to kill Vali from behind. Moreover, it was Lord Ram’s duty to save the earth from demons like Vali and Ravan. If you consider Vali an innocent and strong person, them you are mistaking by favoring him because what all he had done were not crime, they all were sin. Keeping younger brother’s wife as a keep, giving exile to his younger brother from his kingdom without any strong reason were sin which dont deserve only punishment. These sin cannot be compensated with punishment instead blameworthy need to be killed specially for the first sin and same Lord Ram had done with Vali. As far as Lord Ram’s existence as a god or normal person is concerned, this issue is simply created and doesnot have any base to support. In an incarnation, Lord Vishnu undergoes many situations which is a part of his role on the earth be it a happy mode, a sad mode, a war, a love story etc. According to your comments, it is revealed that even Lord Shiv is not god because when Bhasmasur was behind him to keep his hand on Lord Shiv’s head he went to Lord Vishnu for remedy. According to you, now Bhasmasur is stronger than Lord Shiv. Please sir, justify your comments which are not accepted and is simply created to drag the debate to a different path beacuse every individual who believes in god has probably the highest devotion towards Lord Ram (along with Lord Krishna) and his has a blind faith on him. Sir, you must have heard people saying in grief or in happiness or in excitement, only two words “HEY RAM”. No one utters name of an ordinary man in above mentioned situations. Its a different issue that a person doesnt believe in god. Then, there is no use to convince him on the subject. That person may be a very self made hero of his life and doesnt require the shade of god sometimes for his birth and death also. Please sir, any further comments are invited.

    Reply

  4. Prabhat Pandey
    Jul 01, 2011 @ 23:41:44

    Respected Hariharan Sir, as you asked that “have you read any novel where hero cries” so my reply for your question is that, be it a novel or a movie, both are creations and thoughts of writers / producers. As per my experience towards movie or story, i find only hero crying in the movie and the villain laughs till the end of movie. The hero cries in full movie for many situation viz. her beloved being carried away by negative character, his parents being killed, his sister being insulted. But in the end the situations go vice-versa and the villain loses everything and hero gains everything. Because truth and honesty face a lot of problems in early stages but survives till end and wins in the end. Whereas deceit and dishonesty enjoys almost all the early situations but loses and dies in the end.

    Reply

  5. mghariharan
    Jul 02, 2011 @ 19:06:00

    Yes it is dragging. Why did Rama shoot an arrow at Vali when he was fighting with Sugriva. This is a sin. Refer to Dhundhubhi statement. In Yudha kanda Hanuman refuses to hit Ravana when ge is fighting with somebody else as it is bad manners. So first give your reason why Rama killed vali by shooting from behind.
    You had said that vali will get 50 % of rama’s strength as written in Ramacharitha mans. hence my reply. So clarify why he shot the arrow while hiding?

    Reply

    • Pi Laminar
      Aug 16, 2011 @ 12:33:09

      kirAta nyAya is the law of hunting. Hunting too had specific sets of rules. Some of them:

      1) hunter should not kill anything for joy. Though food could be gathered by huntig, it should not be done to satsfy the palate. EVen in Bhagavad Gita Lord krishna tells this

      tE agham bhUnjyatE mudhAh yE pachan chAtmakAranAt

      Those who cook food for their delight are gaining a lot of paap.

      2) Animals which pose problem to the society should be hunted down by the king.

      3) Hunting should not be done when the animals are in a pair and involved in their company.

      4) Hunting could be done by setting a trap etc.

      Reply

      • mghariharan
        Aug 16, 2011 @ 13:01:01

        Rama did not hunt Vali. He execute him as he was an aatataaye. The manusmriti says such a person should be killed immediately overtly or covertly. The word covertly is explained as like a hunter kills a prey. It is an explanation of covert operation. Rama did not hunt vali.

  6. Prabhat Pandey
    Jul 02, 2011 @ 20:06:07

    Respected Hariharan Sir, thanks for your reply. Sir, i would like to first confirm whether you believe in god or not, whether you consider Lord Ram as god or as an ordinary man. Because your harsh attitude towards Lord ram shows that you dont consider Lord Ram as god. So, once you clarify this point than i will reply you in your own harsh words about why the so called innocent Vali was killed by Lord Ram. Because you are bent upon to declare Lord Ram as a coward and you still consider Vali as a very gentle and honest character who was a victim of the so called coward Lord Ram (according to you only). Sir please clarify my both the doubts about your faith in god and treating Lord Ram as god or ordinary man. This will help me to continue the debate in your language only.

    Reply

  7. Prabhat Pandey
    Jul 02, 2011 @ 21:31:15

    Sir, please clarify me what is bad manner and what is good manner? Lord Ram killed Vali who was a demon not by birth but by his deeds. So this is a bad manner to save earth (not only Sugriv) from a demon like Vali. Now good manners are the deeds of the universal super hero Vali like keeping younger brother’s wife forcefully, sending younger brother to exile, attempting to kill him for no reason. Sir what manners you expect from next generations? The so called bad manners of Lord Ram or the good manners of Vali which should be accepted world wide and Vali should be prayed as a “SHAHEED” and not as a demon killed by Lord? Kindly reply.

    Reply

  8. Prabhat Pandey
    Jul 03, 2011 @ 11:42:40

    Respected Sir, your replies are still awaited on this site. Kindly reply and give your views on the subject. You told in your first comments (dated 30 Jun 11) that you are not competent to comment upon Ramcharitmanas but you are very competent to comment on Lord Ram on whom the whole Ramcharitmanas is written. Your comments are not clear on your part only. You can comment on Lord Krishna but not on Bhagvat Githa, you can comment upon Hanuman but not on Hanuman Chalisa. According to you the Mantras, slokas and the epics are greater than the Lord on which they are said / written. Sir, i am badly waiting your replies and comments. Please continue on this site.

    Reply

  9. mghariharan
    Jul 04, 2011 @ 14:24:40

    You are raising too many points at a time. Raise only one so that we can discuss.
    1. I have never said Rama is acoward. Show me where I have said. That Rama was hiding while shooting at Vali is written By Valmiki. I have explained why he did it. It is his duty.
    2. Is Rama a god or man? Vishnu took avatar as human being. He also took the avathar as Kurma (pig) If you ask me is it pig or god I wont be able to answer it. In Valmiki Ramayana Rama as a human being teaches us to follow dharma, If you are having problem in understanding then you are free to read ramacharithamanas and pray to Rama he will definitely bless you.
    3. If you have strong faith that Rama is god then this is not the blog for you. This is for people who question and want to understand hence the blog’s name Understanding Ramayana.

    Reply

    • Pi Laminar
      Aug 16, 2011 @ 12:48:48

      I’m sure its naive to debate on Rama godliness . There are people who argue there is no Shiva and Vishnu and certainly logically you cannot prove them .

      Now did Valmiki mention godliness of Rama and the answer is yes he does not in interpolated Bal Kanda but every Kanda

      Reply

      • mghariharan
        Aug 16, 2011 @ 13:02:46

        Please quote where Rama is projected as god or having godliness in V Ramayana. I could not find anything.

      • Pi Laminar
        Aug 17, 2011 @ 11:30:20

        I shot your argument in the thread the few monkeys torce throw torch and some demon dies , They may be called Hoodlum just like football fan of England disrupt the peace If England lost the match .

        Lord Rama was transfixed so it was Sugreeva who was in command and in previous sarga Indrajit bolted crore of monkey which was genocide by all margin furthermore you make it sound that Ravan was pious guy and his subject were victims . You have missed rape and atrocities of both Ravan and Vali in this blog .

      • mghariharan
        Aug 17, 2011 @ 13:11:56

        NO YOU SEEM TO HAVE MISSED SOMETHING. I have quoted the Sloka where Sugriva gives instructions to Hanuman to go and torch Lanka. These discrepancies are coming because of your assumptions. 1. That Rama is god. and 2. that he will not do wrong which you think as wrong. Please read the intro in Valivadh topics list and see what Rawls says.

  10. Prabhat Pandey
    Jul 04, 2011 @ 21:44:32

    Respected Hariharan Sir, thanks for your reply. It seems that you dont have any more points to submit thats why you are asking me to stay away from this blog. But let me tell you that there was no incarnation of Lord Vishnu as Pig. I dont know from where you have generated this new character. To the best of my knowledge the third incarnation was Varaha the Boar and the purpose of his incarnation as a Boar must be clear to you. If not please ask, i will clarify. But i have never heard anyone calling incarnation of Lord Vishnu as Pig. Further, no blog / debate is complete untill it has both the aspects i.e. support and oppose. How can you expect your blog to be read by one sided people only. That means you want only those people to comment who are not aware of any subject on Ramayan and whatever your blog says is accepted by them. But again you diverting from the main topic i.e. the truth of Vali Vadh. I have many more facts for your knowledge for the debate. Are you accepting the debate or it is the end?

    Reply

  11. Prabhat Pandey
    Jul 04, 2011 @ 22:24:06

    Respected Sir, how do you expect a blog / debate complete without having both the aspects i.e. support / oppose. You expect people with least knowledge and no faith in Lord Ram to access this blog asking various issues about Lord Ram and whatever this blog replies is final for them. No it is not like that. Once you are commenting upon the contents of Ramcharitmanas and Ramayana written by writers of millenium, TulsiDas and Valmiki, how you can expect your blog unquestionable. This blog is not last source of knowledge which you may pass on to others. I have gone under hundreds of sites about Avatars of Lord Vishnu, but this is the first site where i have seen some one calling an incarnation of Lord Vishnu as Pig. Further you have once again diverted the main topic of Vali Vadh. I have lot of facts on the subject to clear your doubts. Continue on the blog Sir.

    Reply

  12. mghariharan
    Jul 07, 2011 @ 10:54:59

    Regarding boar Yes you are correct. I stand corrected. No I am not avoiding arguments. Yes I will approve points against what I said. It is understanding Ramayana. Not Understood Ramayana.
    Let me continue where we let off. In Ramayana Rama is a man. Unlike as in Krishna Avatar. The difference is Suppose it rains heavily I wont try to lift a mountain. Krishna had supernatural powers. But in Ramayana Rama behaves like any normal man but sticks to Dharma. Many of us find it difficult and waver. Understanding Ramayana will encourage us to face problems and try to stick to Dharma. Just for example people like Raja and Kanimozhi etc. are very talented people but deviated from Dharma and rue for it now. Young people believe today that success at any cost is a must. No only Dharmic way will make your success fruitful otherwise pitfalls are many. Ravana was great king successful, and highly educated. But one adharma brought his downfall.

    Reply

    • Pi Laminar
      Aug 16, 2011 @ 10:55:41

      I don’t want to open the Pandora box , Ravan atrocities was unlimited He raped his daughter in law Rambha who was related to Nalkuber son of his elder brother . He had habit to bring virgins and Queen after defeating the kings . This is barbaric and quite unnecessary. Imagine you are raided made captive and treated like shit .
      For god sake don’t tell it was mutual consent not many women would like to jump in bed with a guy who happened to be murderer of her near one and in most case old enough to be her grandfather .

      Reply

  13. Prabhat Pandey
    Jul 24, 2011 @ 18:01:21

    Respected Hariharan Sir, first of all i beg your pardon for my misunderstanding for avoiding the arguements. Sir, as lord krishna lifted the goverdhan mountain, yes it shows that krishna had supernatural powers. But this is a very small comparision supporting that Ram was an ordinary man. You must be aware of Ahillya case. Lifting a mountain is only physical power which even Ravana had attempted. Ahilya was converted to a rock due to misunderstanding by her husband but she regained life and her women structure just by the touch of Lord Ram’s feet. Giving life to a rock is far supernatural than lifting a mountain. As already told that behaving like a normal man being the supreme power is part of role of incarnations. Moreover, this debate is not comparison between Lord Ram and Lord Krishna. This is just reply to your doubt what you raised by inserting a new topic of lifting the mountain. As far as Vali hunt is concerned, it shall continue. First let me know if you still consider Ram as man or god.

    Reply

  14. mghariharan
    Jul 25, 2011 @ 21:11:23

    It is a question of inspiring us. Yes your point that there are some miracles in Ramayana is correct. Many say these have been added later. Regarding Rama is god or man I think he is a man who can make us god or reach god. I will request you to see my chapters where Rama’s behaviour is like any other man. He even makes mistakes while communicating etc. But if your question is suposed to mean will I pray to Rama then I will say better ubndertsand him and get rich rewards, rewards for praying will be commensurate to your faith.

    Reply

  15. Prabhat Pandey
    Jul 26, 2011 @ 00:24:05

    Sir, i am least bothered whether you pray Lord Ram or not. It is your personal thinking. This is the just the start. Not only me, the whole world prays Lord Ram god. You can keep projecting such silly comparisons and i will keep clearing the facts behind them as i have cleared in the case of subject of lifting mountain. According to you, demon Ravana is also a god because he has also lifted the Kailash mountain as lord krishna did and sometimes even superior that lord krishna because he had lifted the complete Kailash and krishna lifted only the Goverdhan. Further, even Hanuman is superior than Lord Ram because he had also lifted mountain for sanjeevani and Hanuman is also superior than Lord krishna because krishna lifted the mountain and stood in one place but Hanuman carried it for a long distance from Himalaya to Srilanka. Vali vadh is far away from you to be accepted and understood. Your facts are very weak and definitely you need to understand not only Ramayan but also some other basics. You can review your comments posted on date 04 Jul. You told incarnation of Lord Vishnu i.e. Kurma as pig but for your required information, Kurma was a Tortoise and not a pig. These silly logics can damage anybody’s image as you are trying to do for Lord Ram but could not prove. You told that there are mistakes made by Lord Ram, please tell me what are those and which god you pray. I will not drag the image but i will prove Lord Ram as god and even superior than others. Please bring out all your facts regarding the mistakes of Lord Ram.

    Reply

    • mghariharan
      Jul 26, 2011 @ 10:05:33

      The problem is not about Pig or Boar(wild pig). The problem is should we understand Rama or have faith in him (Blind), and pray to him. If you say you are not interested in praying to Rama then there is no dispute at all. Yes the whole world prays to Rama, I agree, and I have no objection to it. Then why don’t we try to understand Ramayan (Valmiki) and improve our faith. I am not saying anything without quotations. This is not my opinion. But facts as said by Valmiki. I find many people saying things under the guise of faith which distorts Valmiki Ramayana. Hence the Blog

      Reply

  16. Prabhat Pandey
    Jul 26, 2011 @ 11:36:38

    Sir, no where i told that i am not interested in praying Lord Ram. I told that “i am least bothered whether you pray lord Ram or not”. What you want to understand about Ram may please be cleared. You inserted the logic of lifting mountain, i proved Ram’s superior supernatural powers than what you compared. You also accept the whole world prays Lord Ram and the world is not blind. I asked to submit further facts of about Lord Ram being a god or man. I told you that you continue projecting all the facts you have and i will keep proving them either false or not as factual to prove your words “Lord Ram as common man”. Please only submit the facts and dont divert the discussion to improving faith. As per me, faith and honesty only exist. A man is either honest or not, a man either has faith or he doesnt. There is nothing like more faith or more honest. Sir, once again continue only by submitting facts or some other logics like lifting of mountain or any other supernatural activities which prove someone superior than Lord Ram or Lord Ram inferior than any one. As far as Vali vadh is concerned it will be proved after your clarification of Lord Ram being god or man. Because it is must that your doubts about him being as god or man should be clear, then only you will be able to understand the facts of Vali vadh. In this way you will not accept any facts.

    Reply

    • mghariharan
      Jul 26, 2011 @ 11:57:04

      I said Supernatural things in Ramayana Not in Ram. Rama did not have any supernatural power It is Gautrama’s curse that Ahalya disappears and when Rama comes she re appears. Rama did no supernatural thing.

      Reply

  17. Prabhat Pandey
    Jul 26, 2011 @ 13:42:56

    When Ahilya had disppeared due to Gautrama’s curse, hundreds of people had crossed through the place where Ahilya was in a rock form. Why didnt she re appear due to anybody’s visit, Why she reappears only when Ram touches her. Including Vishwamitra was along with Lord Ram, why did he not touch the rock to insert life in that or any other great gods whom you must be praying, why didnt they come and saved Ahilya? Continue to project other logics also Sir.

    Reply

    • mghariharan
      Jul 26, 2011 @ 19:20:05

      Gautamama’s curse also said she will be revived when Rama comes. Gautama had special powers. She was not turned into a stone as stroy goes. In Valmiki Ramayana she just disapears. Please read my blog and valmiki Ramayana

      Reply

  18. Prabhat Pandey
    Jul 26, 2011 @ 15:38:07

    Moreover, your approach is just like some kids who enjoy the supernatural powers of heroes like shaktiman and phantom and treat them as god. Further, Ram never required to prove that he is a god by lifting mountains and whatever according to you a god does by showing the powers just to prove them that they are god. What powers lord Ram had will be submitted later but first here is something for you. The two words are enough “HEY RAM” to overcome all the grief and adverse situations. Further, it also shows that you will pray or have faith in those who have supernatural powers, because according to you the basic criteria of being god is to have supernatural powers. So here are some recommendations which will help you to select your god to pray
    1. Ravana-Lifted the Kailash (just like lord krishna)
    2. Meghnath-Had the power of maya (disappearing) like any other god.
    3. Rakhtbeej-Who had the power of generating clones on every drop of his blood falling on ground which probably no god had.
    Your logic very well proves these people as god. If these are not enough some more recommendations will be submitted.

    Reply

    • mghariharan
      Jul 26, 2011 @ 19:24:34

      I agree with everything that you have said. demons have super powers. Rama inspires us to fight against superpowers by following dharma. Only Dharma wins. That is the moral of Ramayana

      Reply

  19. Prabhat Pandey
    Jul 26, 2011 @ 20:53:52

    Respected Sir, you are very correct that dharma wins. But survival of dharma without powers (as lord Rama had) is not possible. If only dharma could win any battle, then sugriva could have defeated Vali in the early stages because Sugriv was innocent and Vali did all against dharma. Dharma cannot be simply applied and a battle (battle of Ramayan level) cannot be won without superpowers. Even Vibhishan besides living with the “NISHACHARS” always followed dharma, but the command of Lanka was in the hands of “ADHARMI” Ravana. Why the clause of dharma doesnot apply on Vibhishan and Sugriva? Why it is possible only for supreme powers like Lord Rama to fight for dharma and win also. Because you need strength superior than superpowers of demons to save the dharma and that strenght is supernatural power itself which Lord Ram had. Supernatural power is not only showing some magic show, disappearing and lifting natural creations like mountains and all. You can see the history, though being on the dharma side, humanity always surrenders to the powers of demons and incarnations have to come to save the dharma and the humanity. You need to have supreme powers to apply dharma because if you dont that, negative powers will never allow dharma to survive. For controlling such negative powers you need to have the supreme powers above all, like Lord Ram had.

    Reply

    • mghariharan
      Jul 26, 2011 @ 22:00:17

      You have touched upon the exact point. Here I disagree with you completely. Please Read how Lakshmana defeated Indrajit. That is the message that Valmiki Wants to give. Come what may when Rama is depressed, suspicious, greedy frightened, he follows Dharma. That alone made him come victorious. There is no mumbo jumbo other than this in Valimiki Repeat Valmiki Ramayana.

      Reply

  20. Prabhat Pandey
    Jul 26, 2011 @ 22:41:53

    As far as your last comments are concerned you are still not following one path for supporting your facts. Sometimes you say that (Lord) Ram did sin by killing Vali and now you are telling that (Lord) Ram inspires us to follow dharma. Now what is your idea about dharma and sin, it is still a question on your part only. Once you are telling that Ram made a sin by killing Vali against war rules and now you are telling that he is dharmapurush inspiring to follow dharm. How can a dharmapurush go against rules? Sir reply to my both comments separately. Please dont by pass my any one of these two points.

    Reply

  21. Prabhat Pandey
    Jul 26, 2011 @ 23:11:21

    Please tell me the situations where Lord Ram went depressed, greedy, suspicious and even frightened. As far as indrajeet killing is concerned, i am very clear on that subject. Now what relation it has with Lord Ram’s dharma and powers? And your reply is not at all complete about the requirement of power to save dharma which i submitted about regulation and applying of dharma. Again i am telling you if only dharma is strong, Vibhishan and sugriva could have settled both the cases at their level itself. Sir, one request please, dont always say that “read Valmiki Ramayana, read my blog or any other books”. Whatever fatcs you have, please project on the site on the spot. Whatever i am submitting, is the extract of all the lines written in the books. Whatever i read and understand, i submit the facts with complete details on the spot. I never say that go and read that chapter and then submit your ideas. Now you are telling “Read how Lakshmana killed Indrajeet”. What to read how Lakshmana killed Indrajeet. Project your points on the spot itself with details or brief. Please reply completely on “necessity of power to save dharma” which a normal man doesnot have and though being on the dharma side is unable to save it.

    Reply

  22. mghariharan
    Jul 27, 2011 @ 10:10:47

    Greedy; He was greedy to processes Golden deer though warned by Lakshmana. See the Sloka in comments section of http://wp.me/p15n02-aY . Depressed ( almost mad – 3 Sargas) after losing Seetha. Suspicious many incidences I will cover it in my Blog shortly. No power is required to save dharma, you should follow Dharma, come what may. I will give links for my submissions. Many things are said under Bhakthi. It directly clashes with what is written in Valmiki Ramayana. That is why I am quoting the slokas with meaning. If you just read or go to upanyasas then you get only distorted versions. Main reason is people who preach are not knowledgeable. They also do not understand. Valmiki Ramayana is very cruel according to people like Kamba who has written Ramayana in Tamil. This time you had asked specific questions same way if you find anything wrong in my Postings I will be glad to respond. I do not claim I am always right. But I am only quoting and living it to readers to interpret.

    Reply

  23. Prabhat Pandey
    Jul 27, 2011 @ 11:17:24

    No it is not like that. You definitely need to have powers to save dharma. Dharma cannot be simply saved on the basis of the individual’s statement “I FOLLOW DHARMA”. No negative powers will allow you and dharma to survive. Why only Lord Rama, Lord Krishna, Narasimha come for saving the earth? Why not the other great people like the Maharshi and saints, who stuck to dharma, save the earth? Instead they were brutally killed by the Army of Ravana and none of the “dharma following people” could stop them. Why Vishwamitra approached Dashrath for Lord Ram only for the mission against Adharma. Why didnt he go to any village and picked up two people who were following dharma and wash away the crime and adharm from the society. You also reply why the command of Lanka was in the hands of adharmi Ravana and not in the hands of Vibhishan and why the same applies to Sugriva in the case of Kishkindha command (which was in hands of Vali one of the greatest adharmi) Vibhishan and Sugriva followed dharma but were always helpless and even kicked out by their brothers. Vibhishan had given an advise to Ravan to surrender Sita (a statement full of dharma), but the result was that, he was just kicked off in the full assembly and was thrown out of the empire. Here you can see dharma without powers get only kicks from the adharm and the same applies to Sugriva who got kicks from his adharmi brother Vali. Now where is your dharma clause? Why dharma is so helpless when it is in the hands of normal people and why it wins when it is in the hands of the great Lords like Lord Ram, Lord Krishna, Narasimha, Varah and many more. Sir you cannot regulate dharma in a civilzation without powers. Kindly reply.

    Reply

    • Pi Laminar
      Aug 16, 2011 @ 11:01:05

      I would not like to debate on secondary sources like Kamba or Ramcharitmanas who reflects personal opinion rather than perfection. . I find Kamba Ramayana stupid ….. VR say Ravan dragged Sita like farm animal whereas Kamba try to cover up Ravan act by saying Ravan lifted whole hut.

      Reply

      • mghariharan
        Aug 16, 2011 @ 11:53:36

        Purpose of every Kavya is different. it is not good idea to combine or compare. Ramacharitha manas will inspire bhakthi of Rama. I am trying to understand Valmiki Ramayana and it teaches us Dharma. kambaramayana yes Kamba himself calls vamiki at “Katorachithaha”. This blog only discusses Valmiki Ramayana. So the watch word here is Dharma

  24. mghariharan
    Jul 27, 2011 @ 12:50:16

    I am giving definition of Dharma: Dharma (help·info) (Sanskrit: धर्म dhárma, Pali: धम्म dhamma; lit. that which upholds or supports) means Law or Natural Law (as in the natural order of things) and is a concept of central importance in Indian philosophy and religion. In the context of Hinduism, it refers to one’s personal obligations, calling and duties,[1] and a Hindu’s dharma is affected by the person’s age, caste, class, occupation, and gender.[2] In modern Indian languages it can refer simply to a person’s religion, depending on the context.
    What you are saying is when king or people do not folow Dharma the God comes and re establishes As in Krishna avatar ( yeda,yeda hi dharmasya glanir….etc). But In Valmiki Ramayana I have given many places where Drama is Damned by all characyers and also reconciled ( see http://wp.me/p15n02-8t) that is the purpose of Valmiki Ramayana. Seeta tells Rama do not carry Bow as it a adharma. She says Dharma alone will get you wealth, happiness,or anything you want ( see http://wp.me/p15n02-Uk).These are the lessons that the modern youngsters should learn and understand hence the Valmiki Ramayana.

    Reply

  25. Prabhat Pandey
    Jul 27, 2011 @ 15:06:24

    Yes i am talking about the adharm made by the Kings and negative powers. What are you talking about dharm? The hindu, muslim, sikh, isai? Is it the level of discussing dharma?Dharma definition is not merely someones age and religion. Dharma factor is far away from such small criterias. If a normal citizen moves against dharma, he can very well be punished by the law and authorities. But a normal citizen though being on the dharma side cannot save dharma just by staying on dharma side. Arjun without his gandiv and his powers could not win the battle of Mahabharata just by saying “I AM ON THE DHARMA SIDE”. Was it possible for Arjun without his strength and the support of Lord Krishna. Power of Karn, fighting from the adharma side could have killed Arjun, but it was the power of Lord Krishna who saved him by moving the earth inches below and the arrow moved away from Arjun. Arjuna without the powers and politics of Lord Krishna could have been killed by Bhishma, Dronacharya, Karna though being on the dharma side. His own powers and the powers of Lord Krishna have made the battle of Mahabharata a victory. Pandavas were almost finished. And in Ramayana, Lord Ram fought all the demons not by just claimimg that i am on “DHARMA SIDE” but with his bow and arrow and all the superpowers. Because, just like Lord Krishna, Ravana also had the strenght of lifting the mountain but he was killed in action by Lord Ram. If Lord Ram didnot have supernatural powers, than was it possible for him to beat a demon with that strenght and blessed by not one but two Lords, Brahma and Shiv. It was the greatest God Lord Ram who could only beat Ravana though he was blessed by the great lords. Raja Dashrath was also on dharma side. He never made a crime of ADHARMA level. Why didnt he kill Ravana whose army has destryed almost the complete south and MP zone of Aryvarth? Why other “DHARM FOLLOWING PEOPLE” didnot stop Ravana? Why everybody was waiting for Lord Ram to come and kill Ravana? Why Vibhishan was weak in front of Ravana? Why Pandavas took the help Lord Krishna? Why didnt they fight the ADHARM on their own? Why they required supreme powers of lord Krishna to beat Kauravas? Here it is once again proved that dharm without powers cannot survive. Kindly reply.

    Reply

  26. mghariharan
    Jul 29, 2011 @ 21:38:39

    You probably missed this line “it refers to one’s personal obligations, calling and duties,[1]” Not only kings but you and me also. If you refer to laws or Manusmriti only 10% is for kings regarding ruling. Rest are for us. For example, say how to behave with father when he makes unreasonable demands. How to handle step mother. how to handle mother when cursing you. How to handle Wife when she interferes in your professional work. How to handle brother – Younger, elder.etc. You have written Ravana kicked out Bhibishana. No Ravana had two brothers both disagreed with Ravana’s action But Kumbhakarna agreed to fight with Ravana. Bhibhishana disagreed and departed. While departing he paid respects to Ravana by saying Elder brother is like father but as I disagree with you. Similarly if you see Lakshmana’s actions he wants to kill his father. And Rama cools him down. All these adharma and dharma are for us and are happening daily in our houses. Look at the way youngsters who get hansome salary misbehave with elders with money power.
    You may not like this I am forced to write Ramacharitamans is hardly 1000 slokas but Valmiki Ramayana is more than 24000 slokas. Ramcharithamans will create Bhakthi for Rama but Understanding Valmiki Ramayana will teach you a lot.

    Reply

  27. Prabhat Pandey
    Aug 02, 2011 @ 20:48:42

    Irrespective of whether to accept brother Ravana’s deed or not, both Kumbhakarna and Vibhishan followed their independent path. Kumbhakarna knowingly stood on the ADHARMA side and Vibhishan left. This is well known to everybody. My question is why Vibhishan after knowing all the ADHARMA, didnot fight Ravana and gave justice not only to Sita but also to other slaves of aryavarth. ADHARMA cannot be simply accepted on the basis that “THIS ADHARMA IS DONE BY MY ELDER BROTHER, SO I WILL ACCEPT THIS”. No, DHARMA is independent of all relations and above all requires power to be regulated. Sir, my question still remains unanswered. Why didnt Vibhishan attacked Ravana after knowing all the ADHARMAS made by him? Why he kept himself surrendered and could only advise Ravana and not attack him? Is there any liberty for the elders or the powerful persons to make ADHARMA? All other discussions remain in vogue and will be finalised. But please reply this simply question.

    Reply

    • mghariharan
      Aug 02, 2011 @ 22:23:55

      This is exactly what is called Dharma sankat. Kumbhakarna had to fight for his brother. If your logic is follwed then all army persons can refuse to fight saying I do not agree with the decission of the Govt. Ravana’s action was adharma. That does not give Kumbhakarna the right to refuse to fight. Or else like Bhibhishana he had to get out of lanka. Either way Dharma is being fouled

      Reply

  28. Prabhat Pandey
    Aug 02, 2011 @ 22:59:34

    Dharma sankat cannot be taken as excuse for surrendering in front of a powerful person. What kumbhakarna did was his duty towards Ravana but not dharma. Even he commented Ravan that what he did was ADHARM. If at all he was so obedient, he could have quitely moved towards the war field just like Meghnath. Duty and dharma are two different factors. If dharma sankat is taken as excuse, than all the wars could have been avoided on this basis be it Ramayan be it Mahabharat. Then there is no use of lord Vishnu incarnations because the factor of dharma sankat can be claimed anywhere, anytime and all the sins can be justified on this basis. Dharam sankat is mere excuse for accepting ADHARMA done by the powerful. If at all Kumbhakaran accepted and fought for Ravana, but Vibhishan didnot accept it and left away / or kicked away, where is the reply for not attacking Ravana on dharm factor? It was only his weakness due to which he didnot react Ravana after being insulted in the assembly and left over quitely. The complete Army of Ravan was of NISHACHAR nature and the war had to be fought for saving the civilisation unlike in the case of Vali. Lord Ram held Sugriv to attack Kishkindha because at that side also it was actually Sugriv’s Army which was forcefully deployed by Vali and none of the soldiers could react to the ADHARMA done by Vali and quitely followed his rules. War with kishkindha’s army could have led to loss of innocent soldiers. It was the soldier’s weakness that made them to quitely accept the command of the ADHARMI Vali and hence that of Ravan’s army. How do you take leaving of Vibhishan from lanka without reacting Ravana is still pending? Vibhishan’s acceptance to ADHARMA due to weakness can be taken as reference of all such cases. Dont think i am intentionally forcing to discuss this particular point. Further we will take on the comments submitted by you on 29 Jul 11 in which you have claimed existence of Lord Krishna to save the DHARMA in terms of the qoute YEDA YEDA HI DHARMASYA GLANIR….. because according to me there was no adharm happened in MAHABHARATA. First factor of dharma and power may be made clear to each other which is still pending.

    Reply

    • mghariharan
      Aug 03, 2011 @ 10:27:47

      Dharma sankat is not execuse. for a peson determined to follow dharma, it is a wall which he cannot climb without breaking one of the dharmas. You are following an idea as if Rama is correct and Ravana is evil. This is christan and muslims view of gods creations. I have done a posting saying there is n such thing as evil; both evil and good are residing within us. and our actions turn evil when we follow evil thoughts. Ravana is a great person whoes thoughts were diverted by Shurpanaka. When Akampana comes ravana is turned away by Mareecha. but when shurpanaka raises his lust for woman he is lost and as Hanumn says all his dharma gets wiped away by one adharma. To categorise Ravan as evil person is not correct. After killing Ravana Rama himself says he is a great person and deserves respect and Bhibhishana is told to do death rites to Ravana.

      Reply

  29. Prabhat Pandey
    Aug 02, 2011 @ 23:06:22

    You are telling Vibhishan left over Ravan’s assembly by paying him respect that elder brother is just like father. No, not at all. This is the power of ADHARMA made on weak people who even being exploited / insulted / humiliated by the powerful adharmi, still pay regards because they are not capable of doing anything. Dharma factor is above all relations / greeds / fears and cannot be simply overlooked on the basis of elder brother / father / king / criminal. You are powerful you can very well fight adharm. If you are weak, you are bound to pay respect to the ADHARMI just like Vibhishan. DHARMA CANNOT BE REGULATED WITHOUT POWER.

    Reply

    • mghariharan
      Aug 03, 2011 @ 10:14:37

      sorry I dont agree people who follow dharma are weak people. They are like water acting on a stone and the stone gets eaten away. outwardly they may seem to be tolerant and docile but are strong and mentally much more stronger than people following adharma and seeking pleasure which will not last long. Ravana’s strong feelings to seetha are scoffed by her as worthless.

      Reply

  30. Prabhat Pandey
    Aug 03, 2011 @ 17:06:10

    Sir, first i will reply to your comments posted supporting Ravan as a great man. According to you Ravan was a great person just on the basis of his knowledge. A terrorist may be qualified and they are indeed but they cannot be considered as great person. To acquire immense power and arms one needs huge knowledge and has to qualify many tests which Ravan did. The same qualities even Vali and Meghnath had. Why these types of lust and crime donot grow in other characters of Ramayan like Jamvanth, Sugriv, Hanuman, Nal-Nil, King Dashrath and many more? Why such criminal thoughts grow in minds of characters like Ravan and Vali? Because they are evils. Ravan, Meghnath and many more such characters are crime / lust oriented evils and can never be prayed / considered as a great man. According to you a criminal minded man who rapes a girl is a great man (if he qualified) and was just diverted / oriented as per the situations. So if he is caught by police, i think you will definitely visit for his bail giving your suggestions that he is great man and was just diverted by the lust of mind. We have been given an organ called brain which should be applied to understand between love-lust, marriage-illicit relations, sin-crime, knowledge-wisdom. One cannot claim his innocence on the basis of instant lust or any other such excuse. Sir, you should definitely write a new quote replacing HARE RAMA HARE RAMA HARE KRISHNA HARE KRISHNA as HARE RAVAN HARE RAVAN HARE VALI HARE VALI. You will be blessed by the greetings of such great personalities who seem to be your ultimate inspiration. You are supporting their existence equal and sometimes greater than Lord Ram. Your above mentioned new quote will definitely be accepted to get printed in Ramayan, Ramcharitmanas and even Bhagvatgeeta.
    Coming to my views, as far as death rites of Ravan are concerned, it only shows greatness of the greatest Lord Ram not that of evil Ravan. After war, Indian Army condcuts all the proper death rites of Pakistani soldiers. What does it mean? they are greater that Indian Army. So according to you Indian Army is weaker than Pakistani Army because they conduct proper death rites of dead Pakistani soldiers. Baseless logic.

    Reply

    • mghariharan
      Aug 03, 2011 @ 18:46:48

      I am nobody to call anybody great. I have shown to you the certificate from Hanuman and Rama. It is wrong on our part to condemn anybody as evil, Everyone has justification for doing what they are doing. If it is adharm then whatever may be the justification they are punished.

      Reply

  31. Prabhat Pandey
    Aug 03, 2011 @ 21:20:56

    No one has the right to do crime as it suits him personally. What are you discussing about? It seems you have no points to submit regarding power and dharm so you are now even ready to accept all the adharmas made by negative characters. Now you are simply defending your point about dharma and power and showing such irresponsible attitude to give support to adharmas. Negative characters get encouragement from characters who dont even bother to say that this is not right. Law and society are not based on personal justification. As discussed earlier, you will definitely support a rapist / kidnapper / murderer because according to you it was his personal justification to attempt the crime. Good sense of responsibility Sir. What Lord Ram and Hanuman said was their greatness of equally treating the dead bodies of enemy as well as own soldiers. This no where reflects greatness of your great Ravan.

    Reply

    • mghariharan
      Aug 04, 2011 @ 09:50:08

      I never said anybody has right to do Adharma. I said powerful people are corrupted by power and slip and do Adharma as Ravana did. For this he was punished severely. The act of kidnapping seetha is definitely wrong. I only said Ravana was a great person failing into trap of adharma set off by Shurpanaka, Just as Kaikeyi was spoiled by Mandarai. When Kaikeyi hears about Rama’s anointment as prince she gifts pearl necklace to Mandarai. In 2 saragas of mind blasting she is turned into a Vamp and entire family undergoes trauma including the death of Dasharatha.

      Reply

  32. Prabhat Pandey
    Aug 04, 2011 @ 21:50:28

    No, it is not like that. Why only powerful people make adharma and why they are punished by superpowers only? Because in both ways you need power to regulate/deregulate dharma. Again the same logic you are giving what you gave in case of lust and personal justification. Kaikeyi and manthara were of negative and crooked nature. Manthara applied his game plan only on kaikeyi because she was sure that she is only crooked woman who can misuse the sensitivity of time and promises what she demanded from the three promises made by Dashratha. Manthara could have attempted the game plan on Sumitra also but she was sure that she will straight away refuse it and some times even punish manthara. But she knew the factor of three promises and she also knew the crook nature of kaikeyi which was as equal to that of manthara. It is not that a person is driven away for an instance and he gets the right to attempt the crime/sin. Sending Lord Ram to exile was not an instant immotion. It was a crooked game well planned by kaikeyi and manthara. It was just like planned murder / rape and not as instant reaction. These crook plans clearly reflects the negative nature of these two women. Your logic is not accepted.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 136 other followers