Interesting!!!! Is it really Moral? - Page 4

ok totally agree.. but thinkin abt it
i think that....

prc knew tht if a war was fort jus lyk dat, then due to anger it would make every-1 fighting 4 ajmer weaker bcoz they wld b angry...
nd also givin bhimdev a taste of his own medicine like, bcoz he is allowing bhimdev to realize his own defeat, he is not attacking secretly like bhimdev did, wen he attacks it probs. will b war but he is not going to fight secretly and then slyly kill him ....

well thts wot i tihnk ...

CherryPrinces and Megha....your thinking are to some extent right that Prithvi's approach can't be fully justified!

But, I think, the truth comes from the mythology period that "to kill bad..., you have to become bad...some times, otherwise, you may not be able to kill the bad..."

Example....Pl. recall how Duryodhan was killed by Bhim in the 'gada yudh' in Mahabharata - After Shri krishna's ishara, Bhim hits at the waist area (that is against the rule) and thus Duryodhan died because he got some power from his mother Gandhari that he can't be injured any where else than his waist area....

But, kehte hen na, paap ka ghada ek din bhar jata hei....so duryodhan had to die then, and the devil could only be killed by trick. Will you say here that, Duryodhan did tricks and got some power, but still then, Bhim shouldn't have done any tricks and may be, would have died in the hands of Duryodhan? That wouldn't have been justified either, right?

....In this situation, Bhim's trick can be justified better (if not fully) than Duryodhan's trick.

I feel a same kind of situation between Prithvi and Bhimdev here....Prithvi's trick is to kill a devil in the form of Bhimdev, whereas Bhimdev's effort is to ruin/kill Prithviraj who's no devil to any one.

Now, about expanding wealth being the dharma of a king, I think, it's said for those Kings who went on straight wars for such purposes...and won kingdoms. But if you use tricks for that....that's deceiving...and can't considered as a noble way!


At the end, I want to request Cherry and Megha to do some research and find out that if the Bhimdev killed by Prithvi was the King Bhimdev remembered for his noble did in Gujurat?
From an article (that I forwarded to Cherry) what I understood was ... Bhimdev killed by Prithvi was also named as bhola Bhim and he is not recognized in History for any significant dids (good or bad)!
The Bhimdev who is recognized in History was ruling after about 100 years from Prithvi's death! (...and both Bhimdevs were called as Bhimdev Solonky)

Since Prithvi is remembered for his nobleness and kindness, if he killed king - Bhola Bhim, then its natural to conclude that king bhola Bhim was bad to that extent.

Originally posted by: Kashimani

....Prithvi's trick is to kill a devil in the form of Bhimdev, whereas Bhimdev's effort is to ruin/kill Prithviraj who's no devil to any one.

Prithviraj - is devil only for his enemies;

...and he would not do harm to any one just for his selfishness like Bhimdev did

Given a situation Prithvi and Bhimdev - both would react completely opposite!
For example, while doing justice for a criminal, Prithvi'll keep a room for forgiveness depending on the reason that why the criminal did the crime.

But, Bhimdev...he'll be into just using the king power and punish criminals.

Originally posted by: CherryPrincess

why is there confusion in history for each and every small matter regarding PRC?????? hmmmm!!!!!!!!!!!! cant everything be universally accepted facts?????? 😕

That coz history largely depends on three factors:

1. The evidence available,

2. Historian's interpretation of the available evidence, and

3. The historian's mindset according to the time she/he is writing in.

There can never be an ultimate history nor can there be a neutral history. Universal acceptance of facts would mean an ultimate history...which is not possible.

Hey Kashimani!!!!! I like interesting points u bring up!!!!!!! good debate!!!!!! well even i agree to u that to kill bad sometimes u also have to use bad tricks (but once in a while it's ok).... i liked ur duryodhan example.

btw, about bhimdev, i remember ur article and also otehr articles that were posted in that thread, after reading all that the only conclusion i could reach is that nothing about it was reliable. there were many confusions, even it wasnt confirmed whether bhimdev (1 or 2 whatever) was killed by prithvi. we dont have solid evidence about anything. most likely if some bhimdev was against prithvi, he was that bad bhimdev (not somnath rakshak). but i was just giving bhimdev benefit of doubt that though there are no mentions about his good deeds, there may be something about which we dont know anything, as in history there are many unanswered questions

Right CherryPrincess...History is confusing.

We can debate about History but getting to a conclusion can really be difficult!

I just try to think sensibly and try to learn ethics about life from good stories...but yes, things about life is not that simple!

....I'll leave my philosophies here dear...let me get into some fun topics 😉
Enjoy your day!

😭

Originally posted by: Kashimani

Right CherryPrincess...History is confusing.

We can debate about History but getting to a conclusion can really be difficult!

I just try to think sensibly and try to learn ethics about life from good stories...but yes, things about life is not that simple!

....I'll leave my philosophies here dear...let me get into some fun topics 😉
Enjoy your day!

oh!!!!!!!!!! was my topic not a fun for u!!!!!!!!!!! 😭 just kidding!!!!!!!! i know we had really serious discussions!!!!!!!!!!! but main kya karu? mujhe aise discussions me bada majha aata hai!!!!!!!! 😛

btw phir se wahi discussion start nahi karna chahati, but just a simple thought.......... aaj phir se prithvi ne wo nihatthe sainik logo par war kiya (uske khud ke usulo ke khilaf!-usne khud kaha bhi main bhi dhokhe se hi maruga) par i know what ur answer is going to be and i know what conclusion we would reach!!!!!!!!! 😉 so we may end discussions here!!!!!! 😉

conclusion: prithvi is a good guy..... just think that he had to take such approach to conquer evilness in world (love aur war main kuch bhi chalata hai!!!!!!!!!! aur burai khatam karne ke liye kabhi kabhi teda raasta chunana padata hai!!!!!!👏) jaise ko taisa..........chalo all happy and peace😛 (Edited)

Today's episode...I'll see only the next Thursday!

But, I don't agree with your conclusion that because Prithvi's a good guy so lets ignore his mistakes for a while -
I don't think he's doing mistakes and he has left his usul....I think he's fighting the war in Bhimdev's way..."jaise ko taisa"...

Sorry, if it doesn't make sense to you....but that's my logic and I am also just not supporting Prithvi.....I think, you have to get into the shoes of the person whom you are criticizing.
War is not a game and it doesn't go as ethics/usuls some times....you have to play tricks so as to protect yourself from your enemies, rather than loosing own sainiks, money ....and finally may be your life and kingdom due to unethical tricks of your enemy (example is raja Someshwar)!

...again I'll say, don't bother if I don't make sense to you....my thinkings are solely on my logics....and with my logic I can't make someone from History good or bad...just can give views from what I see.

prithvi is doing the right thing.JAISE KO TAISA AND TIT FOR TAT.as loha ko loha hi katta hai.chal ke chal karo yehi param satay hai.

Originally posted by: lashy

hmmm what you have brought about is a very good debate and a very good point. i agree with you that, prithvi is not taking the straightforward path this time - whatever points anyone makes and mentions both ways, the simple fact is that prithvi is not taking the straightforward path! However, i do think he is doing this (as i would guess any righteous king in the past would have when they wanted to take revenge) to avenge his father's death. 😊

In the battles of Ramayan and Mahabharat i am sure there are numerous incidents that we can pinpoint of this sort that were justified in a battle of good against evil.. yet we hail Shri Ram and Krishna as lords. Prithvi raj was only a human being and a king at that too! 😊

its left to us to decide how good/evil is doing evil against the EVIL? - a debate that will probably never cease? we also compare this because we live in a mordern world where law today is a completely different entity as to what it was in the 12th century. 😊

if someone had killed bhimdev by cheating on him at night i dont know how far vanraj would have stuck to his rajput ideologies while taking revenge! 😉

its strange that when prithvi and his friends used to slash throats of unwitting soldiers from behind, this though never struck any of us - its now that this debate has arisen for the second time.. but it is a good thought..
👏

ya..... u r rite........

it is a BADALA of a loving son 4 is gr8 father..........

n 1 thing "Every thing is fair in Luv N War......."