Everything should be in its right place -Hanuman

Earth is the midpoint. Your karma here can send you to sky or to patal. If things are misplaced it will be like Surasa. She is Nagmatha. Mother of snakes. What she should be doing, protecting Naglok, give proper direction to Nagas , manage Naglok in such a way so that the Nagas always support dharma. Just like Vasuki, just like Anantha.

A mother leaving her place and protecting adharma is the worst thing that can happen. Because her children will also do the same. Protect adharma. Because a mother sets the culture of a family. So Hanuman sends her back to Naglok.

Same thing has happened with Kaikasi. She is given undue importance. Meghand enjoys the food prepared by the mother, but his father listening to his mother's mahatwakamsha place her over and above his well meaning wife and DIL setting himself in the path of destruction. Ravan keeping Kaikasi the way she is , is a wrong placement.

Kaikeyi keeping Manthara the way she keeps was a wrong placement. And the problems happened because of wrong placements.

So in your relations too check if everything is in the right place

U said it all right- Everything has to be in its right place.

As u mentioned about Meghnad, did u notice the placement of colors in that scene. I found the colors too in their right place in that episode. Meghnad's clothes was giving positive vibes. It was all yellow...no sign of anything black for the first time. As his words were full of praise and were filled with positivism and freshness, his yellow color attire rightly symbolized his action in terms of his happiness and joy. Yellow, being the color of hope and sunshine, his words might have given Mando and Sulo a slight ray of hope of bringing their loved ones on the path of dharma. So, yellow was rightly placed over there.

As we know, while Ravan's and Kakasi's were in black, as always, Kaikasi with her black attire was again practicing her power, authority and control over Mandodari and the overall clan at large. Ravan, being rightly placed in black symbolized mystery, again one of the characteristics of black, with first giving smiling reactions and then resorting back to being evil, aggressive and angry.

Prakriti or law of nature moves with action, with karma that is the only thing that impacts it. Not gender, caste, creed or anything.

Hi..ur question is very interesting and it reminded me of ethical theories studied during my academics particularly teleological theories. As per them,the question of dharm and adharm or the basically right and wrong and its situational dependence is decided by not the action but the consequences of the action. If the consequences of an action are more favorable than unfavorable for everyone, then it is the right action. For instance, Ram killing Bali was the right action owing to the end consequences of favorability for all, which is utiliatarian approach.

Kumbhakarna and Meghnad followed their duty of supporting Ravan in Lanka, but Vibhishan went against him. So can Vibheeshan be called as adharmi or wrong because following/supporting the brother is generally considered as right. Here, Kumbhakarn and Meghnad were following ethical egoism because the consequences of the action were favorable only to the agent performing the action. They both were getting the duty-bound happiness of supporting their brother/father. On the other hand, Vibheshan actions are under ethical altruism. Consequences of his action were more favorable to society at large, but not to him as the agent of the action. In the society, he is still referred to as ghar ka bhedi, though his actions are morally right cause of more favorable consequences than unfavorable for the larger section of the society.

So, tallying good and bad end results for the action with respect to affected people helps in deciding whether the conduct is right or wrong.

However, all the theories, as usual, can be put under arguments that both support or reject their application.

I liked your examples but because of these same thoughts, I have a feeling certain things can't have a defined set of rules.

In life also we have only heisenburg uncertainty principle.

This is why my sign is like that😆.

yeah...life is like that- like uncertainty principle. We dont get exact and straight answers coz they dont exist. contradictions go along. I like ur siggy😆

ur questions are extensively covered in ethical theories. They are built on these questions only that u have raised like universality of rules/conduct, relativsism, human conventions, society, selfish interest. Weneva u get time, i genuinely suggest u to go through them- metaethics, deontological and teleoglogical, only if u wish. I guarantee u will not be bored, but might get some of the answers😊.