Understanding Ramayan

2011-04-23T16:50:00.000+05:30

The difference between ethics and morals is multidimensional. This makes it difficult to understand and introduces situations difficult to analyze and cause bewilderment. Let us sum up the confusion regarding ethics and morals.
Ethics originates from (Greek tà ēthiká, ) and morals from (Latin morālis ) but are exactly the same in English. ethics according to Dictionary is "the rules of conduct recognized in respect to a particular class of human actions or a particular group, culture" .Morals on the other hand means "founded on the fundamental principles of right conduct rather than on legalities, enactment, or custom: moral obligations.". The difference is coming in the word legal. Bad Morals is wrong in all situations to all people. But with ethics involves legal implications and social implications of society and interpreted differently according to jurisprudence and the societies stated objectives. For example in earlier times Freedom was less important than rights of possession of wealth as compared to present times. Hence even changes with time.
The Greek word "Ethos," meaning character or personal disposition while the word moral is derived from the Latin "Mos," meaning custom. Therefore it should be argued that ethics are the individual's ability to determine between right and wrong while morals are the societal values collectively. Morals define personal character, while ethics stress a social system in which those rules are applied.
So ethics point to standards or codes of behavior expected by the group to which the individual belongs. This could be national ethics, social ethics, company ethics, professional ethics, or even family ethics. So while a person’s moral code is usually unchanging, the ethics he or she practices can be other-dependent.
Morality based on things such as the 10 Commandments, whereas ethics are based on fairness

Vali’s accusations………of Rama

2011-04-17T15:18:00.000+05:30

Vali accosts Rama with following accusations. Many people question Rama’s ethics of shooting from back. But first let us see what Vali accuses Rama of. The list below is very exhaustive and comprises of many sins.


1	What merit is achieved by you, in sending me to death when I am facing away from you. sloka 4-17-16,त्वम् नराधिपतेः पुत्रः प्रथितः प्रिय दर्शनः \| पराङ्मुख वधम् कृत्वा को अत्र प्राप्तः त्वया गुणः \| यदहम् युद्ध सम्रब्धः त्वत् कृते निधनम् गतः \|\| You are a renowned prince with pleasing looks.. but, which kind of death I am getting now, that too when I was in the commotion of conflict with another, alas, that ignoble death is owing to you, and what merit is achieved by you in this undertaking of yours to kill someone who is facing away from you….. 4-17-21न माम् अन्येन संरब्धम् प्रमत्तम् वेद्धुम् अर्हसि \|इति मे बुद्धिर् उत्पन्ना बभूव अदर्शने तव \|\| "When you have not appeared before me when I confronted Sugreeva my concept was, 'it will be inapt of Rama to hurt me while I am combating with another combatant, besides, when I will be unvigilant in that fight...'…..
2	This senseless murder is not the job of a King . sloka 4-17-19,दमः शमः क्षमा धर्मो धृति सत्यम् पराक्रमः \| पर्थिवानाम् गुणा राजन् दण्डः च अपकारिषु \| "To be able to control senses and will, forgiveness, conscientiousness, resoluteness, truthfulness, and adventurousness, oh, king, are the aptitudes of a king, and even punishing the wrongdoers, too..
3	You have strayed from the path of righteousness sloka 4-17-22,न त्वाम् विनिहत आत्मानम् धर्म ध्वजम् अधार्मिकम् \| जाने पाप समाचारम् तृणैः कूपम् इव आवृतम् \|\| "Not known that your soul is put to death, not known that you are the unrighteous flag bearer of righteousness, to me not known that you are insidious like straw covered well...
4	You are a sinner sloka 4-17-23 सताम् वेष धरम् पापम् प्रच्छन्नम् इव पावकम् \| न अहम् त्वाम् अभिजानामि धर्म छद्माभि संवृतम् \|\| "I have no knowledge that you are a sinner, one in the garb of a benign soul, and explicitly mantled under the garb of probity like ash covered fire.
5	I have not committed any crime in your country or in mine. sloka 4-17-24 विषये वा पुरे वा ते यदा पापम् करोमि अहम् \| न च त्वाम् अवजाने अहं कस्मात् त्वम् हंसि अकिल्बिषम् \|\| फल मूल अशनम् नित्यम् वानरम् वन गोचरम् \| माम् इह अप्रतियुध्यन्तम् अन्येन च समागतम् \|\| "I am non-guilty as I have not committed any misdeed either in your country or in your city, nor I have taunted you; I am a vanara subsisting on fruits and tubers and always moving in forests alone; such as I am, what made you to torture me when I was not combating with you en face, furthermore, when I was involved with another? .
6	No learned person will commit a crime like this Sloka 4-17-27कः क्षत्रिय कुलेजातः श्रुतवान् नष्टसंशयः \| धर्म लिंग प्रतिच्छन्नः क्रूरम् कर्म समाचरेत् \|\| "Will anybody born in Kshatriya's family, a learned one in Veda-s, thereby who is rid of ambiguities with respect to right and wrong, and who is cloaked in an air of probity, execute such a ruthless deed like this? ...
7	I am an animal whose parts are of no use to humans so why did you kill wantonly. sloka 4-17-30वयम् वनचरा राम मृगा मूल फल अशनाः \| एषा प्रकृतिर् अस्माकम् पुरुषः त्वम् नरेश्वरः "We as animals live in forests while you are city dwellers, we live by eating fruits and tubers while you enjoy feasts and banquets, our nature is such to kill and get killed, thus you and me have no correlation. And you, even if you are a man and a prince for humans, you resorted to this animalistic way of killing me lying in the wait, thus your action is worse than that of an animal, if not subhuman or un-princely. , 4-17-38अधार्यम् चर्म मे सद्भी रोमाणि अस्थि च वर्जितम् \|अभक्ष्याणि च मांसानि त्वत् विधैः धर्मचारिभिः \|\| "My skin is unwearable, holy people forbid my hair and bones, and uneatable is my meat for your kind of reputable people. , 4-17-38पंच पंच नखा भक्ष्या ब्रह्म क्षत्रेण राघव \| शल्यकः श्वाविधो गोधा शशः कूर्मः च पंचमः \|\| "Raghava, five kinds of five-nailed animals, viz., a kind of wild rodent, a kind of wild-boar, a kind of lizard, a hare and fifthly the turtle are edible for Brahmans and Kshatriya-s.
8	You did this in distress without thought sloka 4-8-34न ते अस्ति अपचितिः धर्मे न अर्थे बुद्धिर् अवस्थिता \| इन्द्रियैः काम वृत्तः सन् कृष्यसे मनुजेश्वर \|\| "Oh, king, you have no devotion to probity, nor your mind is firm about material gains, but as a free-willed one you are distracted by senses.
9	You killed out of self interest sloka 4-17-33त्वम् तु काम प्रधानः च कोपनः च अनवस्थितः \| राज वृत्तेषु संकीर्णः शरासन परायणः \|\| "But, to you your self-interests are primary, and you are a wrathful, capricious, contriver of kingcraft, and an impetuous shooting-happy archer.
10	You have defamed your father who was great 4-17-43 शठो नैकृतिकः क्षुद्रो मिथ्या प्रश्रित मानसः \| कथम् दशरथेन त्वम् जातः पापो महात्मना \|\| "How are you borne to that great-souled Dasharatha when you are artful, felonious, knavish, disposed to a false modesty subconsciously, and an evildoer?
11	If only you had depended on me you would have achieved your goal easily. sloka 4-17-51 न्यस्ताम् सागर तोये वा पाताले वा अपि मैथिलीम् \|आनयेयम् तव आदेशात् श्वेताम् अश्वतरीम् इव \|\| "I would have brought Maithili at your order even if she is lodged in oceanic waters or in nether worlds, as with the White Horse of Vedic lore.
12	You are a coward and not a valorous person. sloka (4-17-46) ,sloka (4-17-47) 4-17-43 शठो नैकृतिकः क्षुद्रो मिथ्या प्रश्रित मानसः \| कथम् दशरथेन त्वम् जातः पापो महात्मना \|\| "How are you borne to that great-souled Dasharatha when you are artful, felonious, knavish, disposed to a false modesty subconsciously, and an evildoer? So strategy is yet not set.
13	Please answer me if you can sloka (4-17-53) 4-17-53 कामम् एवम् विधम् लोकः कालेन विनियुज्यते \| क्षमम् चेत् भवता प्राप्तम् उत्तरम् साधु चिंत्यताम् \|\| "Admittedly the world is this way, and if possible a relevant reply may gently be thought ofabout your propriety in killing me..." So said Vali to Rama.

It should be noted that Vali did not accuse Rama of hiding while shooting Vali. Many Preachers tell he was hiding behind 7 trees etc. This is wrong. He is accused of shooting when Val was preoccupied and unaware of Rama. He also accuses him of killing him without confronting him

Ethical & Moral Issues in Kishkinda Kanda

2011-03-18T17:01:00.009+05:30

Entire Kishkinda Kanda is reserved for Vali Vadh. Infact Vali Vadh is a divisionary tactic and does not come in the course of the story. As advised by Kabandha, Rama enters into friendship bond with Sugriva and slays Vali. There are many moral and ethical issues that seems to be challenging. The author covers all issues but leaves it to the readers to break the puzzle and understand. It seems the author has everything loaded against the action of Rama. If so why would he do it. It is one thing to overlook some ethical aspect and write the story. But it is another thing to point out everything against an action and still make the hero (of Ramayana) do it. Many people who approach Vali Vadh are not aware of the finer nuances. Just look at following points.


1	Vali is not any criminal. Kabhandha uses the phrase angry Vali 3-72-11श्रूयताम् राम वक्ष्यामि सुग्रीवो नाम वानरः \| भ्रात्रा निरस्तः क्रुद्धेन वालिना शक्र सूनुना \|\| Oh, Rama, listen what I tell... a vanara is there by name Sugreeva, who is vengefully reneged by his brother Vali, the son of Indra. not Bad..
2	The story that Sugriva says clearly that Sugriva had misjudged the situation and countermanded the instruction of Vali. The punishment that he recd. was only banishment.
3	Sugriva did not ask for slaying of Vali. 4-5-30 तव प्रसादेन नृसिंह वीर प्रियाम् च राज्यम् च समाप्नुयाम् अहम् \| तथा कुरु त्वम् नर देव वैरिणम् यथा न हिंस्यत् स पुनर् मम अग्रजम् \|\| By your grace, oh, lion among men, let me regain my wife and kingdom too... oh,god of humans, as to how he does not suffer me again, thus you may please make happen...let not my elder brother turned as an enemy of mine suffer me again... Instead asks that do whatever you may deem it fit so that I am not troubled by my Brother. By this time Rama has already promised to Sugriva in sloka 4-5-25 उपकार फलम् मित्रम् विदितम् मे महाकपे \|\|४-५-२५ वालिनम् तम् वधिष्यामि तव भार्य अपहारिणम्\| A friend is the resultant factor of helpfulness... that I know... oh, great monkey I intend eliminate that Vali, the abductor of your wife... itself, that he will eliminate Vali. Why?
4	In sloka 4-5-30 तव प्रसादेन नृसिंह वीर प्रियाम् च राज्यम् च समाप्नुयाम् अहम् \| तथा कुरु त्वम् नर देव वैरिणम् यथा न हिंस्यत् स पुनर् मम अग्रजम् \|\| By your grace, oh, lion among men, let me regain my wife and kingdom too... oh,god of humans, as to how he does not suffer me again, thus you may please make happen...let not my elder brother turned as an enemy of mine suffer me again... Sugriva wishes to regain his wife and Kingdom. The word used is regained. When did Sugriva lawfully own it. When did it become his kingdom
5	Both Rama and Sugriva are said to be in same position due to separation of Wife. But Sugriva himself says, I did not despair like this for my wife 4-7-6 मया अपि व्यसनम् प्राप्तम् भार्या विरहजम् महत् \| न अहम् एवम् हि शोचामि धैर्यम् न च परित्यजे \|\| Upon me too this yearning caused by the separation of wife has chanced, but I did not despair this way, nor I have forsaken my courage... . That being the case then what for is Vali Sinful. And why should he be sentenced to death
6	In 4-8-3शक्यम् खलु भवेत् राम सहायेन त्वया अनघ \| सुर राज्यम् अपि प्राप्तुम् स्व राज्यम् किमुत प्रभो \|\| Oh, merited one, with your help it will be possible to achieve kingdom of gods,oh, lord, then why tell about one's own kingdom... Sugriva says with the help of Rama “getting my kingdom is sure”. When did it become (his) Kingdom?
7	Rama promises death to Vali but very late 4-8-41श्रुत्वा एतत् च वचः रामः सुग्रीवम् इदम् अब्रवीत् \| किम् निमित्तम् अभूत् वैरम् श्रोतुम् इच्छामि तत्त्वतः \|\| Hearing all that is spoken by Sugreeva, Rama asked, "What for chanced the enmity? I am interested to listen, in its reality. asks the reason for enmity between Vali and Sugriva. So what could be the reason that Rama passes death sentence to Vali?
8	Then depending upon the cause of enmity Ram said he will decide on the method of disposition 4-8-42सुखम् हि कारणम् श्रुत्वा वैरस्य तव वानर \| आनन्तर्यद् विधास्यामि संप्रधार्य बलाबलम् \|\| On knowing the cause of your enmity, oh, monkey, and after a proper thought, and deciding upon the strength and weakness of the cause of enmity, or of the enmity itself, I will do the needful very easily.
9	Vali made Sugriva swear that he will not move from the Hole where he was going to chase Maayaavi
10	4-11-3 वालिनः पौरुषम् यत् तद् यत् च वीर्यम् धृतिः च या \| तन् मम एक मनाः श्रुत्वा विधत्स्व यद् अनन्तरम् \|\| That which is impetuousness of Vali, that which is his bravery and courageousness are there, they may be listened from me single-mindedly, and later you impose that which need be imposed Sugriva requests Rama to know about the valiant Vali and then decide on the method of disposal.
11	Dundubhi says Killing drunken one, unvigilant one, defeated one, or one without weapons, or an atrophied one, gets the sin of feticide. Exactly what Rama did by killing a non vigilant Weaponless Vali.
12	Sugriva asks Rama, how it is possible to eliminate Vali in War? 4-11-68 एतत् अस्य असमम् वीर्यम् मया राम प्रकाशितम् \| कथम् तम् वालिनम् हन्तुम् समरे शक्ष्यसे नृप \|\| Oh, Rama, I am apprising all this to tell about the unequalled vitality of Vali, and oh, king, then how is it possible for you to eliminate Vali in war." Thus Sugreeva enquired with Rama. So strategy is yet not set.
13	When Tara warns Vali about Rama, Vali clearly says Rama will not sin by killing him when he is fighting with Sugriva 4-16-5 न च कार्यो विषादः ते राघवम् प्रति मत् कृते \| धर्मज्ञः च कृतज्ञः च कथम् पापम् करिष्यति\|\| Also, you need not bother about Raghava's doing some harm to me, as I wonder how a diligent man and knower of virtue can commit sin.

These are all ethical issues highlighted by Valmiki in Kishkinda Kanda. And then the killing of Vali ensues!!!
But before going further let us know what is Ethics & Morals.

Back To Vali Vadh Topics List

All Sloka Translations are from the site Valmiki Ramayana

Sandal wood color ……….Red

2011-03-09T11:28:00.002+05:30

In Ramayana sandal wood color is shown as red. What red?

See for yourself........

In Sundara kanda Sarga 10 sloka 8

लोहितेन अनुलिप्त अन्गम् चन्दनेन सुगन्धिना |
संध्या रक्तम् इव आकाशे तोयदम् सतडिद् गुणम् || ५-१०-८

लोहितेन चन्दनेन (lohitenachandanena) = with red sandal wood;

Similarly in Sloka 19

शश क्षतज कल्पेन सुशीतेन सुगन्धिना |
चन्दनेन पर अर्ध्येन स्वनुलिप्तौ स्वलम्क्र्तौ || ५-१०-१९

शश क्षतज कल्पेन (shashakshatajakalpena) = resembling a hare's blood;

Similarly in Sloka 26

रक्त चन्दन दिग्धेन तथा हारेण शोभिता |
पीन आयत विशालेन वक्षसा अभिविराजितम् || ५-१०-२६

रक्त चन्दन दिग्धेन (raktachandanadigdhena) = smeared with red sandal

Again in Ayodya kanda sarga 16 sloka 9

वराह रुधिर आभेण शुचिना च सुगन्धिना |
अनुलिप्तम् पर अर्ध्येन चन्दनेन परम् तपम् || २-१२-९

वराह रुधिर आभेण (varaaharudhiraabheNa) = blood of a boar

So sandal wood color is red like blood of Pig or Hare etc.

Contributed by M H Gopalakrishnan

Back To Ramayana Topics List

All Sloka Translations are from the site Valmiki Ramayana

Kaikeyi A Nepali or Afghan?

2011-03-03T14:26:00.002+05:30

Kaikeyi was from Nepal or Afghan. In those days many Hindu kings used to marry from Eastern Afghanistan which was Hindu Kingdom. The Ladies here were considered beautiful and were sought after. In Mahabharata Gandhari is from the Khandar in Afghanistan. Regarding Kaikeyi some people claim she is from Nepal this blogger believes this is incorrect. After Dasaratha’s death messengers are sent to Kaikey to bring Bharata from his maternal uncle’s residence. The path is clearly demarcated in Ramayana in Ayodya kanda Sarga 68 and again the path of return which was different is also demarcated in Sarga 71. Both are downloadable from this posting. Please refer to it.
From Hastinapur they go west not north. The river Vipasa is mentioned which is River Beas. And similarly while returning the river Shatradru is mentioned which is Sutlej. Also the flow of river Saraswati in map shows clearly in Pakistan. The kingdom Kurula is the modern Rajasthan.
So clearly they traversed very far and the map is leading to Afghanistan.

For more Details Click Here

Download detailed path of messengers Going to Kaikey rajya and Returning

Back To Ramayana Topics List

Nothing Succeeds Like Dharma

2011-01-27T16:08:00.005+05:30

This is in conjunction to Dharma Damned - Character Lakshmana

Though Lakshmana rants against Dharma in the entire sarga 83 (Yudha kanda) when he fights against Indrajit the battle becomes intense and 3 sarga of fight shows relentless Indrajit cause rampage to both Lakshmana and Vibhishana. Then Lakshmana calls upon Rama dharma-nishta (discipline) to shoot an arrow saying
“O my dear arrow! If Rama the son of Dasaratha has set his mind on virtue, keeps up his promise and is second to none in his prowess, destroy this Indrajit.”

धर्मात्मा सत्यसन्धश्च रामो दाशरथिर्यदि || ९०-६-७१
पौरुषे चाप्रतिद्वन्द्वस्तदेनं जहि रावणिम् |

This is the final arrow that kills Indrajit. Thereby Valmiki enunciates that Dharma should be followed however controversial and non beneficial it may seem to be in different circumstances. In short Dharma wins and it is rewarding to follow Dharma. Dharma can be misinterpreted as Indrajit accuses Vibhishana but self satisfying interpretations will not come to aid during crisis. A separate posting of Vibhishana and Indrajit dialogue is awaited.

Back To Ramayana Topics List

All Sloka Translations are from the site Valmiki Ramayana

Rama’s Character

2011-01-12T10:50:00.003+05:30

Much confusions are created without understanding Rama’s Character during analysis of Ramayana. Even according to Myth Vishnu is born only as a man and lives like a man. He has all the failings of man as enumerated below. Then why is he treated a hero. It is because every time he does not let human weaknesses overtake him but rises above them and conquers the situation. In this page we are enumerated the ordinary human virtues that Rama displays. How he conquers them and sets for high standard of behavior is all that Ramayana is all about. But as many Preachers (Upanyasakars) give him a godly cover they distort the Ramayana and falsely create a superman like character and thereby defeat the purpose of Ramayana which is written to give us guidance and moral strength to face all our daily ethical dilemma.
Please refer to Characterization of Rama in Ayodyakanda sarga 1 Sloka Nos. 9 to 32

Back To Ramayana Topics List

All Sloka Translations are from the site Valmiki Ramayana

Kausalya’s Ranting

2011-01-04T17:16:00.005+05:30

This is in conjunction to Dharma Damned- Character Kausalya

        When Rama enters the Kausalya’ s house he find his mother in deep meditation and in the process of performing yagna and puja thanking the gods for making her son he King anointed. But on coming to know that Bharata is going to be the king and Rama is going to forest for fourteen years and live a saintly life, she crumbles, and in disgust rants about the failure of her Vraths (religious rituals like fasting etc.). One can expect this from normal modern woman but not from Kausalya. In fact this can be explained away as her deep seated love for Rama and the anguish of suffering 14 years in forest for her beloved son. No that is not what she says. See, she is disappointed that
1. I would have been better off without a son like you 2-20-36
2. I have not seen prosperity earlier which I thought I will get through you 2-20-38
3. I wanted to get rid of disagreeable behaviors from my co Wives (Kaikeyi) through power 2-20-39
4. She is talking about her grief 2-20-40 not Rama’s
5. Complains about her husband 2-20-42
        So in short what Kausalya is saying that she thought the religious rituals which she implicitly followed are all waste because she did not achieve her goal of power and wealth. The problem during Ramayana days and now are exactly same. We also hear these ranting in many houses and the children finally turn atheists without understanding the implications.
        Rituals are like discipline and following them will lead you to success and help you in facing misfortunes. They do not ward off misfortune.
        Say in a army there are many disciplinary rules about haircut, moustache, polishing the shoes, polishing the buttons etc. This does not mean that best dressed army will win the war. But if discipline is not maintained then even the best equipped and strong army will be defeated as in the fall of Vijaynagar. Going to bar watching movies etc. in itself do not bring calamities. But when misfortune strikes such people who had easy going will crumble and fail miserably.

                                                   Back To Ramayana Topics List

All Sloka Translations are from the site Valmiki Ramayana

Killing Vali- Motive?

2011-01-04T17:15:00.005+05:30

                One major Reason Rama killed Vali is because Sugriva’s wife was taken over by Vali. Ram also had similar problem as his wife was kidnapped by Ravana and he needed the help of Sugriva to find her. Kabandha says it in few words. 3-72-7b&8 - When kings are in trouble they employ one of the 6 tactical moves (The six ideations employed by kings in kingship are 1] sandhi (सन्धि)a covenant with adverse kings; 2] vigraha (विग्रह)continuing hostilities; 3] yaana(यान)waging war; 4] aasana (आसन )sit out for proper time; 5] dvaidhii bhaava(द्वैध भाव) creating factions and vicissitudes in enemy groups; 6] samaashraya (समाश्रय)taking shelter under a coequal.) The one suggested by Kabandha is the 6th one, joining force with a person of equally vulnerable position. Both Rama and Sugriva have lost their kingdom and their wives.
                But there is difference. Whenever Sugriva identifies his problem he says regaining my wife and Kingdom. Kingdom was never his but at least he loves his wife and is bereaving for her,may not be to the same extend as Rama. Sugriva himself says I did not despair like this for my wife 4-7-6 . So when Vali gets killed what would you expect. Sugriva is having nice time with her. No. When angry Lakshmana goes to Kishkinda to express his anger 4-31-22 the lustful Sugriva is with whom? Tara (Vali’s wife). So what exactly is Valmiki telling us. In fact the whole of Kishkinda kanda is a Jigsaw puzzle of Justice in quandary (Dharma sankat). Now the explanation of Killing Vali is going to be more difficult!

                                                   Back To Vali Vadh Topics List

All Sloka Translations are from the site Valmiki Ramayana

Vali & Sugriva Gorillas?

2011-01-03T17:39:00.003+05:30

Valmiki always makes detailed descriptions. But we seem to overlook due to preconceived notions. One such is while using similes about both Vali and Sugriva he uses Black clouds. If they are the rehuses type then the colour black does not fit them. Lets us see. In 4-12-16 while describing Vali he uses the word(तोयदः) which refer to Black water bearing cloud. If Vali is Gorilla then Sugriva who is almost his twin also should be Gorilla. In the same sarga in sloka 4-12-41 Sugriva is also compared to same (तोयदः). If not convincing see 4-17-6 (पयोधर) again meaning black water bearing cloud for comparing Vali. And again in 4-19-22 (महामेघ औघ निःस्वनम्).

For those who are still unconvinced and again when Sugriva calls all the monkeys in 4-37-20 he says 30 Million fly jumpers (monkeys) whose shine is like black mascara (अंजन संकाशा) so the colour is black.
Also the word Vanara in Sanskrit means Semi human. Now the clincher. Valmiki takes great pleasure in expressing emotions using tail for Hanuman or many of the monkeys. In Sundara kanda (23 slokas) and Yudha Kanda (13 slokas) there are mentioning tails of the monkeys. But in Kishkinda Kanda there is absolutely no mention of tail though emotions of valour pathos anger etc. run very high. Why? Because both Vali and Sugriva do not have tail. So…..?

Back To Vali Vadh Topics List

All Sloka Translations are from the site Valmiki Ramayana

Brothers in Dissonance

2010-12-30T17:36:00.001+05:30

The characters of Sugriva and Vali needs to be studied in detail to understand Rama’s behavior towards Vali. When Kabandha describes Sugriva it is full of praise.
The words he uses are Your mission to find Seetha is impossible if you do not befriend Sugriva [3-72-10]; (3-72-12 to14)Self-respectful (आत्मवान्) ; Valiant (वीरः) ; Masterful amongst Vanaras (Monkeys) (वानरेन्द्रो) ; Mettlesome (महावीर्यः) ;Self-resplendent (तेजोवान्) ; ill, limitable, in self-irradiance (अमित प्रभः) ; Honest (सत्य संधो) ; Culture bound (विनीतः) ; Task master (धृतिमान्) ; Mastermind (मतिमान्) ; Masterhand (महान्) ; Capable [adventurer](दक्षः) ; courageous [exploiter] (प्रगल्भः) ; coruscating [in personality] (द्युतिमान्) ; Brave(वीर) ; incomparably intrepid, incursive (महा बल परा) ; Great souled (महात्मना) ; Your (ram’s) helpful friend (सहायो मित्रम्) ; elephantine - straightforward (कुंजरः) ; conversant with all of the strongholds of anthropophagite demons (अशिनाम् लोके नैपुण्यात् अधिगच्छति)
With such excellent references no wonder Rama opted to go to Sugriva instead of Vali. Kabhanda says only one word about Vali i.e. क्रुद्धेन angrily. So nothing bad is said about Vali. Here Valmiki makes a devious course of showing us the character of Vali ( All in the words of sugriva So Biased?). Vali is shown as father’s favorite (पितुः बहुमतः) . Then it is incidences from which we are supposed to draw on Vali’s character. When Maayaavi challenges Vali he immediately rushes in spite of everyone including Sugriva dissuading him. When Maayaavi runs away he follows him chases him. When Maayaavi goes into crater covered with grass he orders Sugriva to wait there, and rushes into the hole chasing Maayaavi. For one year he chases Maayaavi and finally kills him. And during all this time he expects Sugriva to stand guard. When he finds Sugriva has assumed he is dead and is crowned as king gets angry and outcasts him from the kingdom. While chasing Maayaavi he not only kills him but proudly announces he killed his relatives also [4-10-20]. He expected Sugriva to stay there as without his help he will not be able to find the way out. And for not standing guard he attacks his brother. Similarly when Dundubhi challenges him he is given time to recover from drinking, but sets into fight immediately. When Sugriva challenges him for the second time Tara his wife pleads and warns him, even cajoles him to settle the matter with Sugriva amicably. All in vain. Thus Vali is projected as a character with immense strength in the hands of an evil person who causes misery not only to his enemies but also to his near and dear ones. The Rama’s behavior towards the brothers is mainly based on these aspects. When in need, choose a reliably and honorable friend not a strong one.

Back To Vali Vadh Topics List

All Sloka Translations are from the site Valmiki Ramayana

Kausalya the Miser

2010-12-29T11:10:00.002+05:30

Valmiki goes to extreme extend of charactering a person. Sometimes just 1

word is only available to show ones character. Unless one is hyper alert it will be missed. Kausalya being a miser is one such. Manthara when she sees the people of Ayodya in jubilant mood asks a house maid what is happening and why Kausalya the miser is doing lavish charity

उत्तमेनाभिसंयुक्ता हर्षेणार्थपरा सती |
राममाता धनं किं नु जनेभ्यः संप्रयच्छति | २-७-८

Why is Kausalya giving away money to people so delightfully today in charity, even though she is badly lured of money?

The word is ‘अर्थपरा सती”. Many Preachers omit such nuances in character due to hero worshiping of Rama. But in the process they bring the great epic of Ramayana from its high pedestal of Greatest work.

Contributed by Rema A K

Back To Ramayana Topics List

All Sloka Translations are from the site Valmiki Ramayana

Outsmarting Valmiki?

2010-12-27T13:56:00.036+05:30

Many Upanyasakars (Preachers) try to make the story more Valuable by adding from outside Valmiki Ramayana. The Listener’s are not much worried as they enjoy it any way without application of mind. It is also not good manners to criticize the Preacher by finding faults. As In Bhakthi Marga (Cult) all are acceptable under one word of devotion. A person using his intellect is looked down upon. As Bhakthi is accepted as Blind. Now see what happens.Hanuman when coming from Lanka is appreciated for informing the Vanaras ( Monkeys) “Saw Seetha” (In Tamil Kanden Seethayai) The Sloka is 5-57-16 says hanuman (ननाद हरिशार्दूलो) Roared. The Roaring was interpreted as mission successful by Jambhavan 5-57-23 . On landing Hanuman Paid respects to Jambhavan and prince Angada 5-57-34 . In Sloka 5-57-35 he said in brief (दृष्टा देवी) that he had seen Seetha. So the statement saw Seetha was what he is supposed to have said while coming is not correct. Now this error is compounded by many others who want to be wiser. They said “saw Seetha” was made to Monkeys only and that when hanuman met Rama he said “Seetha is chaste” as the first statement. This is also wrong. See what happens. The information about the success of the mission comes much earlier. And then when Hanuman meets Rama and Lakshmana informs 5-64-36 that Seetha is in constant devotion of Rama. And what is nectar (sweet अमृतोपमम् ) to the ears of Rama is the message that Seetha was found 5-64-37 "from the mouth of Hanuman". That Seetha if alive will be chaste is known to Rama he need not have confirmation from monkey. Over emphasizing the chastity of Seetha only spoils the story as if Rama had doubted it. Valmiki has no such qualms. Thus the Preachers are pulling down the quality of story by not understanding the finer nuances of Ramayana as written by Valmiki.

Back To Ramayana Topics List

All Sloka Translations are from the site Valmiki Ramayana

Casteism in Ramayana

2010-12-23T11:29:00.000+05:30

Following article is from
Essay series by Sri.Bannanje Govindacharya

This part of the story is from Uttarakanda. Hence not under the preview of Valmiki Ramayana. The only reason this has been added here is that blogger is acquiescent with this form of discussion and logic.
A lot of intellectuals are mad at Valmiki. This is their complaint: A story where a Brahmin boy is saved by killing a shudra doing penance!? It is caste-ism. ………..
The elite respond: Aha! If that is the case, then Rama is the culprit. To turn a person, who upholds caste-ism, into a Hero is also Valmiki’ s fault.
Some folks (…)It cannot be Valmiki’ s writings; (…)They can neither like nor dislike the story(…)
If we want to understand a work, we should immerse ourselves in the beliefs of the time and the author of the work. On the contrary, we cannot heap our beliefs on the author!
(…)So, then, what is the poet’s belief here? What is the background?
To get to this, we need to understand one basic fact. Doing penance is not anything great, in itself. The goal of penance is what is important.
One can do penance for the good of the world: that is satvik. On the other hand, one can do it for the well being of the self: that is rajasik. Worst is when the penance is aimed at the destruction of the world. Now, that is definitely tamasik.
A lot of sages have performed penance; so have the likes of Ravana and Hiranyakashipu. The sages got salvation. Ravana and others like him get destroyed. Both are fruits of penance. A curse can become a boon. And, a boon can become a curse.
Who did it is not the issue. What they did is not important. Why they did it alone is the key issue: the differentiator between right and wrong.
So, let us forget about who Shambuka was, just for a moment. Why did he do penance? ….. As the ancient teachers say, and as Valmiki briefly points out, here was his goal: to conquer the world of the Devas. ….. Even beyond Indra. ……. He wanted to become Shiva himself. (……) Now that is a height worth aspiring for, (..)
So, that was Shambuka’s desire. Anyone who approves of such a penance should be admitted to a mental hospital!
(…) That was satvik penance. (..) Now, Shambuka’s is not good for the world. The punishment for this has to be greater. Death alone is the right punishment.
Even Ravana had similar desires. (……)Now, this fellow has worse desires. Rama would have made a grave mistake if he killed Ravana, but left Shambuka alone.
(….)
There is another point to be made here. Ravana was a Brahmin(…).But, Rama killed him.
A Brahmin who makes a mistake has to be punished. A shudra, if he does not make a mistake, should not be punished. That is Valmiki’s belief; that is Rama’s belief. It would bring discredit to the spirit of the source, if we interject caste-ism into the mix.
The seeds for this topic were sown at the start of the Ramayana itself. (….)Dasaratha(…..)He thought it was an elephant drinking water. But, the arrow actually hit a young mendicant. (…) the youth says: “Oh King! I am not a brahmin. I am a shudra mendicant. My father is a vyshya and my mother is a shudra. First, go and take care of them.”
So, Ramayana starts with a curse of a shudra mendicant. (….) So, we can conclude one thing: It is true that Shambuka was a shudra. But, that is not the reason Rama killed him. It was Shambuka’s base mentality.
(..)
Translated to English by P. R. Mukund
So, in the midst of confusion, Shambuka too plays a part in the portrayal of the greatness of Rama’s character.

Back To Ramayana Topics List

Rama a Vegetarian Faddist?

2010-12-23T11:28:00.032+05:30

Vegetarianism is great fad in India. Especially with reference to religion. Ramayana being a great religious book its treatment of vegetarianism is of great blogging brawl. Everybody wants to see his version anything opposite is stiffly contested with no hold barred. This post tries to approach this subject with unwavering straight forwardness taking Valmiki Ramayana as Guide. All misrepresentations in some major blogs are also pointed out and discussed.
Rama was a Kshatriya and a meat eater. Many believe the dawn of Buddhism and Jainism brought this fad about vegetarianism. Ramayana a Tamil version written by Kambar converts Rama as a vegetarian. May be but, Valmiki Ramayana also gives great importance to vegetarianism.
Even when Rama was anointed as king he was advised by Vasishta to fast and sleep on grass mat. So frugal food and avoidance of luxury (of even mattresses) is a part of religious rites even for kings.
Then again when Rama finds he has to go to forest (for 14 yrs.) he tells his mother Kausalya that he will desist from meat and live on roots and fruits in the forest 2-20-29 . Again he says to Guha he desists from meat 2-50-44 . Again to Bharadwaj muni he says they are ascetic and are vegetarians 2-54-16 . Then in Sundara Kanda Hanuman tells Seetha that Rama is not taking Meat 5-36-41 . So what is the doubt? Two verses are creating problem. After meeting Guha, Rama and Lakshmana kill many animals and become hungry and rest under big tree 2-52-102. This makes many believe that they ate the meat. This is not true and there is no such statement. Again after Bharadwaj muni‘s ashram they again hunt is said to have eaten 2-55-33 . This is also not correct. The word charatur is translated as ate but means roamed in river forest Yamuna. Though there are many places where Seetha offers meat sacrifice and even offers Ravana when he comes as Brahmin. This is definitely confusing but the facts as said in Valmiki Ramayana are that Rama is a meat eater but abstains from meat for 14 years in forest.

Back To Ramayana Topics List

All Sloka Translations are from the site Valmiki Ramayana

Rama Encounter 1 (Tataka)

2010-12-23T11:23:00.011+05:30

This is a part of series of posts that highlights Rama Character and Expertise as enunciates in Ayodya kanda Sarga 1.

First fight that Rama encounters is with Tataka. Bala Kanda sarga 24. Here the conversation with Vishwamitra shows Rama’s Character traits. And unfortunately for Rama his first victim happens to be Woman. He immediately questions Vishwamitra as to the cause of such strength in Tataka. Vishwamitra gives him the detailed story of Tataka. Then after knowing the villainous nature of Tataka decides to kill her justifying it as the Instructions of his father to obey Vishwamitra and also as instructions of Vishwamitra. This shows Rama’s Judgment capability (even at the age of 12) to view contrary Dharmas (Duties between not killing a woman and following the instructions of Elders/Guru) and choose the correct option 1-26-2/3. Refer to Rama’s Character Trait 2-1-16,18. See the page on धर्मसँकट.
When the fight ensued Rama first tries to ward her off by snipping (with arrows) her ears and nose. He tips off Lakshmana that he will stop her impudence, and mobility. But she in turn threw lots of dust and created a shell of cloud around them and started raining stones at them 1-26-15. Rama in turn strikes her arms and Lakshmana angrily cuts off her nose and ears. Vishwamitra understood their predicament and instructs them to kill, as sun was setting and she would have become more powerful 1-26-22,23. Rama immediately shoots an arrow at her chest and kills her 1-26-25. Vishwamitra applauds this. The performance of Rama at the age of just 12 describes his calmness under difficult situations and skill in fight, learned thoroughly.

Back To Ramayana Topics List

All Sloka Translations are from the site Valmiki Ramayana

Dharma vs Faith (Duty or blind Faith)

2010-12-23T11:21:00.000+05:30

Ramayana and Mahabharata are stories which create situations where justice is in crisis. Two conflicting Dharma (धर्मसंकट Daharmasankat = Crisis of justice) make ones decision to act difficult. A typical Catch 22 situation. The stories show how people with evil mind take advantage of these situations in their favor and good people resolve it even if it is against their immediate benefit. Thus, these stories should be analyzed thoroughly to understand and practice. As these are knowledge based creations, many learned people have elaborated and tried to explain. But the dawn of Bhakthi marga (faith worship) these attitudes underwent a change these books were turned into religious books extolling its mere recitation even without understanding. This blog tries to correct this tendency and is trying in a humble way to look into every aspect for the purpose of understanding. The viewer’s participation will help in this endeavor. The blogger believes Valmiki is taking lots of pain to take us through emotional trauma while following Dharma. Reading the Ramayana carefully will guide us through this understanding.All Situations in Ramayana are looked into form this aspect and analyzed.
List of Pages in this blog identifying such conflict of Dharma situations are:
Rama Encounter 1 (Tataka) unfortunately for Rama his first victim happens to be Woman more

More to follow

Back To Ramayana Topics List

All Sloka Translations are from the site Valmiki Ramayana

Financial Wizard Rama Ensnared?

2010-12-23T11:17:00.018+05:30

During discussing with Maareecha Ravana says clearly 3-40-18 Make yourself an amazing deer seeing which 3-40-19 Seetha will ask Rama to get it. Take Rama away from the hermitage 3-40-20 and shout “Ha Lakshmana” “Ha Seetha” in Rama’s voice. So the Plan is very clear. Exactly the same thing happens (see Seetha defiled).
In sloka 3 Seetha calls Rama and Lakshmana. And sloka 5 Lakshmana says it is Maareecha. This is amazing because both Rama and Lakshmana had same contacts with Maareecha. Then why did not Rama identify him as such? Lakshmana wastes 2 more slokas explaining Mareecha’s villainous nature. Now Seetha intervenes with white smile (शुचि स्मिता = toothy smile, innocent smile) 3-43-9. Intervenes, means he is ticked off and asked to shut up? Lakshmana never says anything later. Now Rama repeats the advantages of the possessing the deer and almost parrots what Seetha said. He gives 2 more arguments. One is that it is a piece of antique and needs to be possessed. From when did Rama become a financial wizard? He is awe struck by the dazzling deer 3-43-23. Repeatedly wonders on the value of Gold and jewelry. Rama Dreams of amassing wealth by capturing the Deer 3-43-33. Compounds the argument by saying Dreaming of wealth and achieving is the dream is a laudable objective. This nature of Rama seems to be strange but it is supported by Ayodya kanda sarga 1 where his character is portrayed. 2-1-26 He knew the ways and means of getting income as well as the system of spending, as perceived by economic sciences. This is the only reference to his (संदृष्टव्ययकर्मवित्) knowledge of economics. Did he make a right decision financially? Anybody’s guess. Why so inverted arguments? Because Rama should be so far away that after Maareecha shouts for help, Lakshmana should be sent out, Ravana should carry Seetha, fight with Jatayu, before Rama returns. Unless he is single mindedly pursues the deer he will not go that far.

Back To Ramayana Topics List

All Sloka Translations are from the site Valmiki Ramayana

Ramayana Novel?

2010-12-23T11:15:00.000+05:30

Many readers who read western books such as Arthur Haily's etc. will be surprised as to how Ramayana is written. In the Hailiy’s books the reader jumps from various situations and characters who meet almost at the end in a climax like situation. But In Ramayana The reader is always travelling with a character.
In Bala Kanda When Vishwamitra comes the reader travels with him till Seetha marriage and go to Ayodya with Rama.
In Ayodya Kanda when Rama is sent to Forest. The reader goes with Sumanthara the charioteer. Return to Ayodya after dropping Rama in forest. Then again go with Sumanthara to fetch Bharatha. Then go with Bharatha to meet Rama. Then Go With Rama till Kishkinda Kanda. Then Go with Hanuman and finish Sundara Kanda. And Then Go with Rama till Yudha Kanda end.

Another Unique feature of this book is the author is just carrying a camera and shows us what is happening and records all statements. Does not say what the characters are thinking. This leads many to interpret as they like and where reasoning is not satisfactory quote from other scriptures to justify or interpolate arguments. But the way Valmiki has written he has given enough hints to come to correct conclusion. The blogger thinks Valmiki Ramayana should be understood and then only Criticized.

Back To Ramayana Topics List

All Sloka Translations are from the site Valmiki Ramayana

Seetha Defiled

2010-12-23T11:09:00.017+05:30

Link to Ramayana Aranyakanda sarga 43.
We seem to explain every action of Rama and justify it by tainting others character. Typical Indian Nature (We insult others to show us in high moral ground). If Rama is a hero he should stand scrutiny, based on his actions. If it is inexplicable then so it is. But our Upanyasakars (preachers) take the easy way out by changing the story slightly.
Why did Rama run after the golden Deer. Because Seetha insisted that she wants it. She implored Rama to get it for her. This in spite of, Rama’s warning her about the Deer being a demon. Correct. No.
Now the correct story is. Maareecha converts himself into a very delightful deer with extraordinary characteristics such as antlers with sapphire, skin of golden hue etc (3-42-15 to 19).Ambles to Rama’s Ashram and freely moves about until Seetha sees it 3-42-32. She starts to call Rama and Lakshmana to see the deer 3-43-3 . Immediately Lakshmana warns Rama in clear terms that it is Maareecha 3-43-5. Details to Rama of Mareecha’s activities 3-43-7.Thus Lakshmana gives timely warning to Rama. Seetha interrupts him and asks 3-43-9 for the deer 3-43-10. Praises the deer as a good plaything (3-43-10 to15). Says it is a good plaything even on return to Ayodya 3-43-17. If it cannot be captured its skin will be of high value 3-43-20. And in the very next sloka waits for Rama’s Response 3-43-21. Then throughout the sarga there is no mention of Seetha speaking. So from Sloka 10 to 17 Deer is praised and its value extolled. Rama himself is amused by the Deer and encouraged by Seetha’s words 3-43-23. Rama then explains to Lakshmana the value of this Deer from Slokas 25 to37. Then says even if it is demon Maareecha it needs to be killed (sloka 38 to 46).
Thus the arguments if any are between Rama and Lakshmana. Seetha sees the Deer (Maareecha) first calls Rama and Lakshmana. Extols its value. It is Rama who falls for the trap and runs after the deer. So Seetha cannot be blamed for Rama running after the Deer. Then what exactly is the reason? There is one sloka that needs mention more to follow

Back To Ramayana Topics List

All Sloka Translations are from the site Valmiki Ramayana

Why Sugriva not Vali?

2010-12-23T11:04:00.005+05:30

In order to understand Vali Vadh we need to get all our data clear. The first person who introduces Vali and Sugriva to Rama is Kabandha. Let us see what he says (or what and all he says). Kabandha when incinerated turns into celestial body 3-72-4स विधूय चिताम् आशु विधूमो अग्निर् इव उत्थितः |
अरजे वाससी बिभ्रत् मालाम् दिव्याम् महाबलः ||
In a trice that highly dynamic Kabandha zoomed up shoving off that pyre, and he is now attired in lily-white vestments and angelic garlands,and appeared like a fumeless fire..Immediately, he advices Rama as to how he should overcome his misfortune. First he says people who are in difficulties can easily join together in solving their problems 3-72-7b,8 शृणु राघव तत्त्वेन यथा सीमाम् अवाप्स्यसि || ३-७२-७
राम षड् युक्तयो लोके याभिः सर्वम् विमृश्यते |
परिमृष्टो दश अन्तेन दश आभागेन सेव्यते || ३-७२-८
Oh, Raghava, how you will regain Seetha,that you listen from me in its essence.
oh, Rama, by which and which analyses everything will be analysed,six of such ideations are available in this world.and when a person is touched down by a spell of nemeses, he shall adore one who is equally in such spell of nemesis....You cannot solve your problem by another method 3-72-10तत् अवश्यम् त्वया कार्यः स सुहृत् सुहृदाम् वर |
अकृत्वा न हि ते सिद्धिम् अहम् पश्यामि चिन्तयन् ||
Oh, best among kind-hearted ones,thereby you have to certainly befriend such a soul in similar dire straits...however deeply I may think,I am not able to perceive your accomplishment if you do not befriended with such a soul.So clearly he says if you do not befriend Sugriva you will not be able to solve your problem. Then he introduces Sugriva and Vali and says Sugriva has been (निरस्तः क्रुद्धेन) outcast derisively. Note there is no derogatory reference to Vali. Then Sugriva has qualities required immediately to solve your problem What are they? They are as follows. Sugriva is a masterful one among vanaras, highly mettlesome, self-resplendent, and illimitable is his self-radiance... and he is also truth-bound and culture-bound... a mastermind, master-hand and a taskmaster...3-72-13वानरेन्द्रो महावीर्यः तेजोवान् अमित प्रभः |
सत्य संधो विनीतः च धृतिमान् मतिमान् महान् ||
He that Sugreeva is a masterfulone among vanara-s, highly mettlesome,self-resplendent,and illimitable is his self-radiance...and he is also truth-bound and culture-bound...a mastermind, master-hand and a taskmaster...
.What stands out is reliable, efficient and Expert( see also 3-72-14दक्षः प्रगल्भो द्युतिमान् महा बल पराक्रमः |
भ्राता विवासितो वीर राज्य हेतो महात्मना ||
He is a capable adventurer, a courageous exploiter and incomparable one in intrepidity and a brave one in incursions, and his personality will be coruscating ever and anon, for he is the son of Sun-god... but he is banished by his self-conceited brother owing to the reasons of kingdom...
). None of these qualities can be attributed to Vali. Hence Rama is commanded to go to Sugriva immediately. And advised, to enter into a friendship bond with Sugriva. Then most important Do not underestimate this monkey 3-72-18b,19न च ते सो अवमन्तव्यः सुग्रीवो वानर अधिपः || ३-७२-१८
कृतज्ञः काम रूपी च सहाय अर्थी च वीर्यवान् |
You shall not look down on that lord of monkeys taking him as a lowly simian, why because that Sugreeva is a valiant one, a guise changing wizard and presently he is in the need of a bolsterer, and if you render help he will be obligated to you for ever..Then he says how to find Sugriva and how search for Seetha has to be launched
So the instructions are very clear and Rama just implicitly follows it.

Back To Vali Vadh Topics List

All Sloka Translations are from the site Valmiki Ramayana

Dharma Damned in Ramayana?

2010-12-23T10:59:00.049+05:30

Here are some collections. In all the slokas below various characters in Ramayana deride Dharma as a useless tool

Kausalya:
1) Sloka 2-20-48उपवासैः च योगैः च बहुभिः च परिश्रमैः |
दुह्खम् सम्वर्धितः मोघम् त्वम् हि दुर्गतया मया ||
You were nourished in vain by me,the important one by fasts,by meditations, by various difficult and painful vows. Kausalya decries religious fasting etc
2) Sloka 2-20-52इदम् तु दुःखम् यद् अनर्थकानि मे|
व्रतानि दानानि च सम्यमाः च हि |
तपः च तप्तम् यद् अपत्य कारणात् |
सुनिष्फलम् बीजम् इव उप्तम् ऊषरे ||
I feel bad since all my religious vows, charities, restraints have all gone waste.The austerity I performed for the sake of of-spring has gone in vain, as a seed sown in a saline soil. Kausalya moans about useless religious woes

Explained in Kausalya's Ranting

Seetha
3) Sloka 5-25-20 Under pressure from the demons Sita bemoans her birth as a human being itself
4) Sloka 5-28-12 says good character is of no use.

Lakshmana
5) Yudha kanda sarga 83 for railing against Dharma by Lakshmana. When they are informed that Seetha has been killed, Lakshmana derides the path of dharma specifically 6-83-14 to 39. Most of these statements we hear daily and envy the successful people as corrupt and blame our misfortune on our virtue.
a) Sloka 6-83-14 Virtue cannot save you, from adversities and is (hence) useless.
b) Sloka 6-83-15 Therefore, my opinion is that virtue is non-existent.
c) Sloka 6-83-16 likewise this form of virtue of vice is not established. For, in that case, a virtuous man like you would not have this misfortune.
d) Sloka 6-83-17 If unrighteousness had been effective, Ravana should have obtained the hell. You, endowed with virtue, would never obtain such troubles
e) Sloka 6-83-21 Since prosperities of those, in whom unrighteousness is rooted, develop; while those who have a conduct of virtue suffer, hence these two (virtue and vice) are useless.
f) Sloka 6-83-24 It is not clear how prosperity can be reached by righteousness, which has never known how to retaliate. Hence, righteousness seems to be non-existent.
g) Sloka 6-83-27 Depend on might, as you do now on virtue, if the virtue is subordinate to might, thus giving up predominance of virtue
h) Sloka 6-83-28 Or else, if speaking truth were indeed a virtue, our lying father, who was merciless to you, was disunited from you. Were you not bound by that announcement made by our father regarding your installation as the Prince Regent?
i) Sloka 6-83-33 All the tasks of a man of small intellect, bereft of his wealth, get a cessation as small rivers dry up in summer-season
j) Sloka 6-83-35 Friends gather round him, who has riches. Relatives stand by him, who has riches. He alone is virile in the world, who has riches. He alone is a learned man, who has riches.”

Explained in Nothing Succeeds Like Dharma

Rama:
Rama who is praised for abandoning the kingdom for his father’s vow blames his father for misfortune derides his fathers character.
6)A)Sloka 2-53-10 Rama bemoans his fate and blames his father for his fate
B) Sloka 2-53-13 Blames his father as sensuous
Jabali
7)A)Sloka 2-108-4 condemns Parental duty by claiming it to be sign of dim wittedness
B)Sloka 2-108-05 to 06 Advises detachment from Parents
C) Sloka 2-108-14 condemns after death rituals (Shradha) just as in modern days as waste of Food.
D) Sloka 2-108-15 will food eaten by Brahmin reach another then can you feed him when is going on long journey this way?
E) Sloka 2-108-16 Charity is prescribed to induce others to give else it has no
F) Sloka 2-108-17 There is nothing beyond this universe be Practical

In conclusion we find Dharma being derided by one and all characters in Ramayana in Ayodyakanda, Aranyakanda, Kishkindakanda, Sundarakanda, and Yudhakanda. Whereas we are told to believe Rama as a person who follows Dharma and Ramayana as work which persuades us to faithfully Dharma, how come in so many places Dharma is condemned?

Back To Ramayana Topics List

All Sloka Translations are from the site Valmiki Ramayana

With Respect to Vali?

2010-11-23T12:33:00.009+05:30

Many find it easy to cast Vali as a villain, and explain killing him.

The idea of Rama shooting from behind is a bit difficult to explain. But that he is a villain and deserves punishment is accepted and not questioned. The only version of Vail’s villainy is as projected by Sugriva. The Discourse that Vali has with Tara makes it very clear that Vali is reasonable and does not wish to kill Sugriva 4-12-11 . Vali character as projected by Sugriva shows that he is strict and tough. That being the case, Sugriva closing the cave on assumed death of Vali is an unpardonable decision. To make the matter clearer the story goes as follows. When Maayaavi challenged Vali He immediately rushed to meet him. Though Sugriva and others pleaded him to desist Vali spurned all of them away and forged ahead 4-9-8. Sugriva also follows him against instructions. Now when Maayaavi runs into a crater and disappears Sugriva is instructed to stand guard on the entrance. It is here that Sugriva makes the mistake of closing the hole for whatever reason that may seem to him to be right. For this he is only banished 4-8-32 from kingdom by Vali. So Vali is not criminal or Villain who needs to be killed. Rama must have known this that is why when Rama and Lakshmana approach him when lying with mortal wound they approach him with respect 4-17-12b,13. This respect shows that Vali is not one to be despised but respected and only by quirk of fate happens to be at the receiving end of Rama’s arrow.

Back To Vali Vadh Topics List

All Sloka Translations are from the site Valmiki Ramayana

Brothers in Unison?

2010-11-22T15:06:00.000+05:30

Neither Sugriva wanted to kill Vali nor Vali wanted to kill Sugriva then why did Rama kill Vali?

वालिनो मे महाभाग भय आर्तस्य अभयम् कुरु || ४-५-२३
कर्तुम् अर्हसि काकुत्स्थः भयम् मे न भवेद् यथा |

"Oh, highly fortunate Rama, affirm fearlessness to me from Vali by who I am highly intimidated, and as to how there will be fearlessness to me from him, it will be apt of you to accomplish that, that way... [4-5-23b, 24a]
Thus Sugriva lives it to Rama how he will ensure the fear is removed.
In another Place

तम् अद्य एव प्रियार्थम् मे वैरिणम् भ्रातृ रूपिणम् |
वालिनम् जहि काकुत्स्थ मया बद्धो अयम् अंजलिः || ४-१२-११

"Oh, Rama, today itself you eliminate that enemy of mine in a brother's semblance for my happiness, for which I adjoin my palms in supplication." Thus Sugreeva requested Rama. [4-12-11]
Wrong translation! Jahi is to conquer not kill
Immediately Rama says

उपकार फलम् मित्रम् विदितम् मे महाकपे ||४-५-२५
वालिनम् तम् वधिष्यामि तव भार्य अपहारिणम् |

"A friend is the resultant factor of helpfulness... that I know... oh, great monkey I intend eliminate that Vali, the abductor of your wife... [4-5-25b, 26a]
I intend to kill (वधिष्यामि) says Rama. Hence it is his decision.

Similarly Vali also tells Tara that he will not kill Sugriva but will only thrash him

प्रति योत्स्यामि अहम् गत्वा सुग्रीवम् जहि संभ्रमम् |
दर्पम् च अस्य विनेष्यामि न च प्राणैर् वियोक्ष्यते || ४-१६-७

"You may do away with your perplexity as I will retaliate Sugriva on my going there only to drive him and his arrogance out, but without letting his lives loose. [4-16-7]
So why did Rama kill Vali?

Back To Vali Vadh Topics List

All Sloka Translations are from the site Valmiki Ramayana

Ramayana vs Mahabharata

2010-11-18T17:07:00.000+05:30

Both Ramayana and Mahabharata are great work of art in itself.
But Ramayana is more famous and recited in many house on a daily basis. Ramayana is considered as more religious book than Mahabharata. From the point of view of drama and thrill both are equally good works. Then why is this partiality towards Ramayana? Rama is more loved hero than Dharmaputra. The reason could be because, Ramayana is more popular with Ladies. Ladies don’t find the Mahabharata attractive as it is more on ethics of state craft. Whereas Ramayana is more on mundane relations such as Brothers (Rama and Bharata or Sugriva and Vali or Ravana and Vibhishana and Kumbakarna). Father and Son (Dasaratha and Rama, Vali and Angada, Ravana and Indrajit), Mother and son (Kausalya and Rama, Kaikeyi and Bharata, Sumitra and Lakshmana), Mother-in-law and daughter-in-law (Kaikeyi and Seetha, Kausalya and Seetha), master and servant (Rama and Hanuman), Friends (Rama and Sugriva) etc. The ethics and emotions are more common in our day to day life and can easily relate. Understanding them makes our life richer and livelier. Hence Ramayana has become more popular and is enacted as Drama even in far of places such as Indonesia, even by Muslims there etc.

Back To Ramayana Topics List

All Sloka Translations are from the site Valmiki Ramayana


1	What merit is achieved by you, in sending me to death when I am facing away from you. sloka 4-17-16,त्वम् नराधिपतेः पुत्रः प्रथितः प्रिय दर्शनः \| पराङ्मुख वधम् कृत्वा को अत्र प्राप्तः त्वया गुणः \| यदहम् युद्ध सम्रब्धः त्वत् कृते निधनम् गतः \|\| You are a renowned prince with pleasing looks.. but, which kind of death I am getting now, that too when I was in the commotion of conflict with another, alas, that ignoble death is owing to you, and what merit is achieved by you in this undertaking of yours to kill someone who is facing away from you….. 4-17-21न माम् अन्येन संरब्धम् प्रमत्तम् वेद्धुम् अर्हसि \|इति मे बुद्धिर् उत्पन्ना बभूव अदर्शने तव \|\| "When you have not appeared before me when I confronted Sugreeva my concept was, 'it will be inapt of Rama to hurt me while I am combating with another combatant, besides, when I will be unvigilant in that fight...'…..
2	This senseless murder is not the job of a King . sloka 4-17-19,दमः शमः क्षमा धर्मो धृति सत्यम् पराक्रमः \| पर्थिवानाम् गुणा राजन् दण्डः च अपकारिषु \| "To be able to control senses and will, forgiveness, conscientiousness, resoluteness, truthfulness, and adventurousness, oh, king, are the aptitudes of a king, and even punishing the wrongdoers, too..
3	You have strayed from the path of righteousness sloka 4-17-22,न त्वाम् विनिहत आत्मानम् धर्म ध्वजम् अधार्मिकम् \| जाने पाप समाचारम् तृणैः कूपम् इव आवृतम् \|\| "Not known that your soul is put to death, not known that you are the unrighteous flag bearer of righteousness, to me not known that you are insidious like straw covered well...
4	You are a sinner sloka 4-17-23 सताम् वेष धरम् पापम् प्रच्छन्नम् इव पावकम् \| न अहम् त्वाम् अभिजानामि धर्म छद्माभि संवृतम् \|\| "I have no knowledge that you are a sinner, one in the garb of a benign soul, and explicitly mantled under the garb of probity like ash covered fire.
5	I have not committed any crime in your country or in mine. sloka 4-17-24 विषये वा पुरे वा ते यदा पापम् करोमि अहम् \| न च त्वाम् अवजाने अहं कस्मात् त्वम् हंसि अकिल्बिषम् \|\| फल मूल अशनम् नित्यम् वानरम् वन गोचरम् \| माम् इह अप्रतियुध्यन्तम् अन्येन च समागतम् \|\| "I am non-guilty as I have not committed any misdeed either in your country or in your city, nor I have taunted you; I am a vanara subsisting on fruits and tubers and always moving in forests alone; such as I am, what made you to torture me when I was not combating with you en face, furthermore, when I was involved with another? .
6	No learned person will commit a crime like this Sloka 4-17-27कः क्षत्रिय कुलेजातः श्रुतवान् नष्टसंशयः \| धर्म लिंग प्रतिच्छन्नः क्रूरम् कर्म समाचरेत् \|\| "Will anybody born in Kshatriya's family, a learned one in Veda-s, thereby who is rid of ambiguities with respect to right and wrong, and who is cloaked in an air of probity, execute such a ruthless deed like this? ...
7	I am an animal whose parts are of no use to humans so why did you kill wantonly. sloka 4-17-30वयम् वनचरा राम मृगा मूल फल अशनाः \| एषा प्रकृतिर् अस्माकम् पुरुषः त्वम् नरेश्वरः "We as animals live in forests while you are city dwellers, we live by eating fruits and tubers while you enjoy feasts and banquets, our nature is such to kill and get killed, thus you and me have no correlation. And you, even if you are a man and a prince for humans, you resorted to this animalistic way of killing me lying in the wait, thus your action is worse than that of an animal, if not subhuman or un-princely. , 4-17-38अधार्यम् चर्म मे सद्भी रोमाणि अस्थि च वर्जितम् \|अभक्ष्याणि च मांसानि त्वत् विधैः धर्मचारिभिः \|\| "My skin is unwearable, holy people forbid my hair and bones, and uneatable is my meat for your kind of reputable people. , 4-17-38पंच पंच नखा भक्ष्या ब्रह्म क्षत्रेण राघव \| शल्यकः श्वाविधो गोधा शशः कूर्मः च पंचमः \|\| "Raghava, five kinds of five-nailed animals, viz., a kind of wild rodent, a kind of wild-boar, a kind of lizard, a hare and fifthly the turtle are edible for Brahmans and Kshatriya-s.
8	You did this in distress without thought sloka 4-8-34न ते अस्ति अपचितिः धर्मे न अर्थे बुद्धिर् अवस्थिता \| इन्द्रियैः काम वृत्तः सन् कृष्यसे मनुजेश्वर \|\| "Oh, king, you have no devotion to probity, nor your mind is firm about material gains, but as a free-willed one you are distracted by senses.
9	You killed out of self interest sloka 4-17-33त्वम् तु काम प्रधानः च कोपनः च अनवस्थितः \| राज वृत्तेषु संकीर्णः शरासन परायणः \|\| "But, to you your self-interests are primary, and you are a wrathful, capricious, contriver of kingcraft, and an impetuous shooting-happy archer.
10	You have defamed your father who was great 4-17-43 शठो नैकृतिकः क्षुद्रो मिथ्या प्रश्रित मानसः \| कथम् दशरथेन त्वम् जातः पापो महात्मना \|\| "How are you borne to that great-souled Dasharatha when you are artful, felonious, knavish, disposed to a false modesty subconsciously, and an evildoer?
11	If only you had depended on me you would have achieved your goal easily. sloka 4-17-51 न्यस्ताम् सागर तोये वा पाताले वा अपि मैथिलीम् \|आनयेयम् तव आदेशात् श्वेताम् अश्वतरीम् इव \|\| "I would have brought Maithili at your order even if she is lodged in oceanic waters or in nether worlds, as with the White Horse of Vedic lore.
12	You are a coward and not a valorous person. sloka (4-17-46) ,sloka (4-17-47) 4-17-43 शठो नैकृतिकः क्षुद्रो मिथ्या प्रश्रित मानसः \| कथम् दशरथेन त्वम् जातः पापो महात्मना \|\| "How are you borne to that great-souled Dasharatha when you are artful, felonious, knavish, disposed to a false modesty subconsciously, and an evildoer? So strategy is yet not set.
13	Please answer me if you can sloka (4-17-53) 4-17-53 कामम् एवम् विधम् लोकः कालेन विनियुज्यते \| क्षमम् चेत् भवता प्राप्तम् उत्तरम् साधु चिंत्यताम् \|\| "Admittedly the world is this way, and if possible a relevant reply may gently be thought ofabout your propriety in killing me..." So said Vali to Rama.


1	Vali is not any criminal. Kabhandha uses the phrase angry Vali 3-72-11श्रूयताम् राम वक्ष्यामि सुग्रीवो नाम वानरः \| भ्रात्रा निरस्तः क्रुद्धेन वालिना शक्र सूनुना \|\| Oh, Rama, listen what I tell... a vanara is there by name Sugreeva, who is vengefully reneged by his brother Vali, the son of Indra. not Bad..
2	The story that Sugriva says clearly that Sugriva had misjudged the situation and countermanded the instruction of Vali. The punishment that he recd. was only banishment.
3	Sugriva did not ask for slaying of Vali. 4-5-30 तव प्रसादेन नृसिंह वीर प्रियाम् च राज्यम् च समाप्नुयाम् अहम् \| तथा कुरु त्वम् नर देव वैरिणम् यथा न हिंस्यत् स पुनर् मम अग्रजम् \|\| By your grace, oh, lion among men, let me regain my wife and kingdom too... oh,god of humans, as to how he does not suffer me again, thus you may please make happen...let not my elder brother turned as an enemy of mine suffer me again... Instead asks that do whatever you may deem it fit so that I am not troubled by my Brother. By this time Rama has already promised to Sugriva in sloka 4-5-25 उपकार फलम् मित्रम् विदितम् मे महाकपे \|\|४-५-२५ वालिनम् तम् वधिष्यामि तव भार्य अपहारिणम्\| A friend is the resultant factor of helpfulness... that I know... oh, great monkey I intend eliminate that Vali, the abductor of your wife... itself, that he will eliminate Vali. Why?
4	In sloka 4-5-30 तव प्रसादेन नृसिंह वीर प्रियाम् च राज्यम् च समाप्नुयाम् अहम् \| तथा कुरु त्वम् नर देव वैरिणम् यथा न हिंस्यत् स पुनर् मम अग्रजम् \|\| By your grace, oh, lion among men, let me regain my wife and kingdom too... oh,god of humans, as to how he does not suffer me again, thus you may please make happen...let not my elder brother turned as an enemy of mine suffer me again... Sugriva wishes to regain his wife and Kingdom. The word used is regained. When did Sugriva lawfully own it. When did it become his kingdom
5	Both Rama and Sugriva are said to be in same position due to separation of Wife. But Sugriva himself says, I did not despair like this for my wife 4-7-6 मया अपि व्यसनम् प्राप्तम् भार्या विरहजम् महत् \| न अहम् एवम् हि शोचामि धैर्यम् न च परित्यजे \|\| Upon me too this yearning caused by the separation of wife has chanced, but I did not despair this way, nor I have forsaken my courage... . That being the case then what for is Vali Sinful. And why should he be sentenced to death
6	In 4-8-3शक्यम् खलु भवेत् राम सहायेन त्वया अनघ \| सुर राज्यम् अपि प्राप्तुम् स्व राज्यम् किमुत प्रभो \|\| Oh, merited one, with your help it will be possible to achieve kingdom of gods,oh, lord, then why tell about one's own kingdom... Sugriva says with the help of Rama “getting my kingdom is sure”. When did it become (his) Kingdom?
7	Rama promises death to Vali but very late 4-8-41श्रुत्वा एतत् च वचः रामः सुग्रीवम् इदम् अब्रवीत् \| किम् निमित्तम् अभूत् वैरम् श्रोतुम् इच्छामि तत्त्वतः \|\| Hearing all that is spoken by Sugreeva, Rama asked, "What for chanced the enmity? I am interested to listen, in its reality. asks the reason for enmity between Vali and Sugriva. So what could be the reason that Rama passes death sentence to Vali?
8	Then depending upon the cause of enmity Ram said he will decide on the method of disposition 4-8-42सुखम् हि कारणम् श्रुत्वा वैरस्य तव वानर \| आनन्तर्यद् विधास्यामि संप्रधार्य बलाबलम् \|\| On knowing the cause of your enmity, oh, monkey, and after a proper thought, and deciding upon the strength and weakness of the cause of enmity, or of the enmity itself, I will do the needful very easily.
9	Vali made Sugriva swear that he will not move from the Hole where he was going to chase Maayaavi
10	4-11-3 वालिनः पौरुषम् यत् तद् यत् च वीर्यम् धृतिः च या \| तन् मम एक मनाः श्रुत्वा विधत्स्व यद् अनन्तरम् \|\| That which is impetuousness of Vali, that which is his bravery and courageousness are there, they may be listened from me single-mindedly, and later you impose that which need be imposed Sugriva requests Rama to know about the valiant Vali and then decide on the method of disposal.
11	Dundubhi says Killing drunken one, unvigilant one, defeated one, or one without weapons, or an atrophied one, gets the sin of feticide. Exactly what Rama did by killing a non vigilant Weaponless Vali.
12	Sugriva asks Rama, how it is possible to eliminate Vali in War? 4-11-68 एतत् अस्य असमम् वीर्यम् मया राम प्रकाशितम् \| कथम् तम् वालिनम् हन्तुम् समरे शक्ष्यसे नृप \|\| Oh, Rama, I am apprising all this to tell about the unequalled vitality of Vali, and oh, king, then how is it possible for you to eliminate Vali in war." Thus Sugreeva enquired with Rama. So strategy is yet not set.
13	When Tara warns Vali about Rama, Vali clearly says Rama will not sin by killing him when he is fighting with Sugriva 4-16-5 न च कार्यो विषादः ते राघवम् प्रति मत् कृते \| धर्मज्ञः च कृतज्ञः च कथम् पापम् करिष्यति\|\| Also, you need not bother about Raghava's doing some harm to me, as I wonder how a diligent man and knower of virtue can commit sin.