DOTW: Ravan and his deeds - Page 8

Yuyutsa was the only son of Dhritrashtra who survived the Mahabharat war. I guess he was given the kingdom of Indraprastha by Yudhistir...Vibhishan was also the only one who survived the war ...

I don't know if Shri Ram could/could not win the war with/without Vibhishan but there was no fault in Vibhishan's behavior or decisions...following dharma must be the ultimate aim of every individual and Lord KRishna said this clearly in Geeta.....

Despite of all his misdeeds, Ravan was one of the greatest shiv bhakts....When he did tapasya and got a lot of boons from brahma and Shivji, he got arrogant of his powers and became a rakshas...When he lifted the Kailash parvat, Shivji was very annoyed with him but he could not kill him because bhagwan can never kill his bhakt...hence he requested Vishnu to take a incarnation to free the Earth from Ravan's atrocities....

He probably knew very well that Ram will win over him bec. he is Vishnu but still he never surrendered bec. his ego and arrogance didn't let him to do it..but in the end, he did remember God and got moksha....

I wud perhaps always hate Ravan as a character but the old Ramayan made him a hero of some sorts towards the end i feel...or may be i liked the actor more 😆

Charu

Originally posted by: Chandraketu

Off topic, but since it's come up...

The comparison of Vibhishan and Shakuni is skewed because Shakuni did everything he did for Dhritarashtra & Duryodhan. Shakuni's better counterpart in the Ramayan would be Manthara, who wanted Bharat on the throne the same way Shakuni wanted Duryodhan. Of course, since Bharat was not remotely like Duryodhan, the comparison ends there. Vibhishan, otoh, was never interested in the throne for either himself nor any relatives, and in one of the accounts I've read, his son died fighting on Ravan's side. Essentially, Vibhishan survived all his relatives and was left with a completely destroyed kingdom. Emotionally, he'd have had everything to gain had he stuck by and died for Ravan the way Kumbhakarna did.

Conversely, Vibhishan's closest counterpart in the Mahabharat was Yututsu, Duryodhan's little known step brother who switched sides in the battlefield and joined the Pandavas. Militarily, he was no use to them, and his reasons for joining them were similar to Vibhishan's, except that he doesn't seem to have been humiliated the way Vibhishan was - something glossed over by Sharath. And unlike Rama, who had the prerogative of massacring Lanka had no such appeals from Vibhishan materialized (even though he most likely would not have), there was never any danger of the Pandavas massacring Hastinapur, since it was originally their father's kingdom. Therefore, even Yututsu appeared to be less loyal to his family than Vibhishan, although both rightly joined sides with what they considered as dharm.

Thanks you Charu.

Ultimately, Shri Ram could win over Lanka very easily and with no help, because he is an incarnation of Lord Vishnu. But then, why would he take an avatar on Earth? Why didn't he just appear in Ravan's chamber one day as Lord Vishnu and behead him with his sudarshan chakra? Why did he suffer as a human, feel the pain humans usually do along with joy, create relations with humans on Earth, marry Mata Lakshmi again in a human form? That's because he wanted to teach us the ideals humans should set, and show us the right way to live.

Hence, since Shri Ram lived as a human for us, he had to also behave like a human only, meaning he could not (in the sense that he would not) disregard Ravan's curses/boons (which he could have). He already knew everything Vibhishan told him about Lanka, but he listened to him like any ordinary mortal, because he needed to act like a human. He let Lakshman kill Indrajit, Hanuman kill Akshay Kumar among others, etc, because he also wanted his devotees to get fame for annihilating those who followed Adharma.

So, yes, ultimately Shri Ram could kill Ravan without any help, but he also could not because he took a human avatar and therefore had to act like one.

And yes, Ravan was a great Shiva Bhakt, and he was also well versed in the Vedas and other Holy Scriptures. He knew all the rules of Dharma and Adharma, but what led him astray was his weakness for women (whether they be others' wives or not) and his disregard for Vishnu Bhakts (he had his followers kill sages who did yagnas to the Devas or Lord Vishnu). He also had great pride in his strength and fame, so much that he humiliated the Devas and many great Sages who ended up cursing him. This is what made him an Adharmi.

From the character of Ravan, I believe the greatest lesson is that one should not be led astray by money, fame, or power, and pride should never enter our hearts. We should always maintain a humble nature, and God will be pleased with us.

Thanks for your insight Charu. It's been awhile since you came to this Forum.

thanks for letting me know..i read something else abt Yuyutsu..may be tht source was incorrect..no probs..it hardly matters..

reg. Arvind Trivedi, i liked the actor very much n I feel he played Ravan to perfection..I loved the acting of Indrajeet too ..he had put in a lot of depth in his character..he is no more now.....Despite of being villains, these guys made the characters so much likeable..I loved Ravan's scenes during the war..When Indrajeet came to tell him that Ram is Vishnu..When Ravan told Mandidari that Ram might be Vishnu but even Vishnu will learn how difficult it was to defeat Ravan...Whenever there will be a mention of Ram, there will be a mention of Ravan..Ravan amar rahega..i can't forget all those dialogues....When he told Mandodari that if he won't fight then how will he win?

Charu

Originally posted by: Chandraketu

Re: Yuyutsu, from what I read, it was the other way around. Yuyutsu was made mayor of Hastinapur, and while the Pandavas stayed there, Parikshit made Indraprastha his capital, or at least his center of operations, and quite a few generations of Pandava rulers kept it that way.

Re: Ravan, if you liked the actor more, he was brilliant. He went on to become a successful BJP MP from Gujarat (joining it the same time as Dipika). Dipika was MP for only 1 term but wasn't re-nominated, since she was regarded as a disaster as MP. Arvind Trivedi, otoh, wwent to to become quite successful.

Sorry for straying of topic on both of the above

Dear Lalitha,

It was not possible for Vishnu to defeat Ravan bec. of Brahma's boon that nobody except human or monkey could kill him....

Ram could not have killed Ravan alone without vanar sena's help bec. of the curse from Narad (or i don't remember who) that he won't be able to win the fight without the help of vanars..

It's difficult to speculate whether or not Ravan could be defeated any other way...I can't understand the role of Vibhishan this way..If this was not necessary this would not have happened the way it did...that's what i feel....Ram knew everything, he also knew there is no animal like a golden deer..yet he allowed Ravan to abduct Sita because his ultimate aim was to finish all the asuras and this was the only way...whatever happened happened for a reason .....Vibhishan's presence with Ramji must have happened for some reason only..

Lord Vishnu took incarnation on Earth bec. of the curses and secondly, Brahma's boon to Ravan that only a human or monkey could kill him...Vishnu could not defeat Ravan bec. he was a shiv bhakt....he tried to kill him with his sudharshan but Ravan was not killed..He was invinsible ..same way it was not possible for Ram to kill Indrajeet bec. of the boons of Indrajeet which we all know....now we can't say that this is not possible bec. Ravan, Indrajeet all these had won over all the Gods , the nav grah and all loks...Only Laxman could have killed Indrajeet...

P.S i hardly watch Ramayan on NDTV but since the discussion was abt Ramayan the epic, i could not stop myself 😊

Charu

Originally posted by: godisone

Thanks you Charu.

Ultimately, Shri Ram could win over Lanka very easily and with no help, because he is an incarnation of Lord Vishnu. But then, why would he take an avatar on Earth? Why didn't he just appear in Ravan's chamber one day as Lord Vishnu and behead him with his sudarshan chakra? Why did he suffer as a human, feel the pain humans usually do along with joy, create relations with humans on Earth, marry Mata Lakshmi again in a human form? That's because he wanted to teach us the ideals humans should set, and show us the right way to live.

Hence, since Shri Ram lived as a human for us, he had to also behave like a human only, meaning he could not (in the sense that he would not) disregard Ravan's curses/boons (which he could have). He already knew everything Vibhishan told him about Lanka, but he listened to him like any ordinary mortal, because he needed to act like a human. He let Lakshman kill Indrajit, Hanuman kill Akshay Kumar among others, etc, because he also wanted his devotees to get fame for annihilating those who followed Adharma.

So, yes, ultimately Shri Ram could kill Ravan without any help, but he also could not because he took a human avatar and therefore had to act like one.

And yes, Ravan was a great Shiva Bhakt, and he was also well versed in the Vedas and other Holy Scriptures. He knew all the rules of Dharma and Adharma, but what led him astray was his weakness for women (whether they be others' wives or not) and his disregard for Vishnu Bhakts (he had his followers kill sages who did yagnas to the Devas or Lord Vishnu). He also had great pride in his strength and fame, so much that he humiliated the Devas and many great Sages who ended up cursing him. This is what made him an Adharmi.

From the character of Ravan, I believe the greatest lesson is that one should not be led astray by money, fame, or power, and pride should never enter our hearts. We should always maintain a humble nature, and God will be pleased with us.

Thanks for your insight Charu. It's been awhile since you came to this Forum.