DOTW: Relationship between Ram and Laxman - Page 9

Originally posted by: coolpurvi

No one is saying Draupadi is complete incarnation of Laxmi. she is only a part incarnation. dont say that's impossible.

Originally posted by: coolpurvi

Only lord Ram was complete epitome of Lord Vishnu (as mentioned in Yuddha Kand). othre bros of Him were part incarnation. confusion lies in the interpretaion of the word "part". sudarshan chakra, shankha, shesh nag r not just mere ornaments of Lord Vishnu. they r parts of Lord Vishnu

Originally posted by: coolpurvi

Ignorance n narrow mindness was the cause of all doubts. Ans a ques honestly. Dont u ever did any mistake out of ignorance ever? I did many times. Repented for them from the bottom of my heart. Dont I deserve to be forgiven for my mistakes

None is perfect. We cant gaurantee that we never did any mistakes or till our last breath we will never do any mistakes. after all we r human beings

Originally posted by: Chandraketu

It would be the first, if not only, instance of any god/ess having multiple incarnations simultaneously: e.g. Parashuram's avatar ended when Rama's began. I always read that Rukmini was the incarnation of Lakshmi - this is the first time I'm reading that about Draupadi. That actually would raise a different question, actually 2 -

1. Are God/desses capable of cloning themselves as mutiple avatars at the same time?

2. Have there been instances in Hindu mythology where that's actually happened?




Okay, but again, my question was - what is the source of it? I don't recall seeing that in Valmiki, so is this something that originated in Manas, or some other version?



I guess we have different definitions of what constitutes 'mistakes'. To me, if I neglected to pick my kid up after school because I thought my wife was going to, that would be a mistake. In that sort of a situation, yes, I'd repent and want to be forgiven.

However, if I was the cause of something major, like someone's death, or untold suffering to somebody else, let alone Gods, I wouldn't forgive myself nor deserve to be forgiven. Sure, forgiveness is a great quality, but it's generally earned after the sinner has suffered the consequences for the sin. Otherwise, people guilty of major crimes would just have to apologize, and that would be the end of the story. Forgiveness does not imply that the person being forgiven doesn't face any consequences. It definitely does not mean that the person being forgiven should be rewarded for it, which is what happened here.

In this epic, both Vali & Ravan were responsible for the separation of a husband from his wife, and both paid for it with their lives, and were then forgiven. The people of Ayodhya were guilty of the same crime, yet not only were they not punished, but at the end of the day, they got to go in their mortal forms to Vaikuntha.

If only Sita and Lakshman were as lucky.

Originally posted by: desichica

Just think about this....Sita mata & Laxmanji both did not get the death sentence, they never did die!!!! BUT they did return back to their abode, bcause their time on earth was over!!!!!

Sarg 106 - Lakshman's Swargaarohan

Seeing Raam sitting lowering His head, Lakshman said - "You shouldn't be sad for me. Kaal's behavior is very strange. You keep your Dharm and promise by killing me." Raam got extremely sad hearing Lakshman's words, but He called His ministers and Purohit and told them about the coming of Muni's messenger, His promise, and coming of Durvaasaa Muni. Vashishth Jee said - "O long-armed, We know about your separation from Lakshman and your destruction. Don't break your promise, leave Lakshman. If somebody breaks the promise then his Dharm is destroyed."

Raam said to Lakshman - "Hey Saumitra, To keep my Dharm, I leave you. Both leaving and to kill a good man are alike." Hearing Raam Lakshman started weeping. He came out immediately and went to Sarayoo River, instead of going to His own home. There He did Aachman and controlled His all Indriyaan. He stopped breathing. Devtaa showered flowers and Indra took Lakshman with His body to Swarg, but no human being could see it.

Originally posted by: Chandraketu

I would not use Sagar as the last word on this, given the number of things he freely made up.

Sita did not die, but as for Lakshman, one can read and decide for oneself whether he did or not (incidentally, the clause below about him going straight to the Sarayu river instead of to his own home seems to suggest that Urmila was still around):

Sarg 106 - Lakshman's Swargaarohan

Seeing Raam sitting lowering His head, Lakshman said - "You shouldn't be sad for me. Kaal's behavior is very strange. You keep your Dharm and promise by killing me." Raam got extremely sad hearing Lakshman's words, but He called His ministers and Purohit and told them about the coming of Muni's messenger, His promise, and coming of Durvaasaa Muni. Vashishth Jee said - "O long-armed, We know about your separation from Lakshman and your destruction. Don't break your promise, leave Lakshman. If somebody breaks the promise then his Dharm is destroyed."

Raam said to Lakshman - "Hey Saumitra, To keep my Dharm, I leave you. Both leaving and to kill a good man are alike." Hearing Raam Lakshman started weeping. He came out immediately and went to Sarayoo River, instead of going to His own home. There He did Aachman and controlled His all Indriyaan. He stopped breathing. Devtaa showered flowers and Indra took Lakshman with His body to Swarg, but no human being could see it.

Originally posted by: desichica

Ok so it seems to me that u are adamant on thinking that Laxman did recieve the "death sentence"...or ur just misunderstanding the whole idea...

Originally posted by: Chandraketu

Actually, no, I did note that Rama disowned him, but was disputing your contention that Lakshman didn't die i.e. voluntarily give up his life after that in an yogic technique. What Valmiki describes above was precisely that, and Indra taking his body to Vaikuntha, whereas what Tulsidas (and Sagar) describe is him going to the Sarayu, meditating, being instantly transported to kshirsagar, and then transforming into Sesha-nag. (Also, for the record, I wasn't criticizing Rama here as I was with Sita, but rather pointing out that there was no need for kaal/Durvasa/Brahma to try to force Rama's hand by causing Lakshma's death - a point you obviously missed.)

Valmiki's account above had Lakshman dying, and Indra taking his body to Vaikuntha (just as the devas did for Krishna after he was killed). Tulsidas' account didn't have Lakshman die, but instead showed him going to Vaikuntha automatically.

Quite different accounts, wouldn't you say?

P.S. I too didn't intend to offend anyone, but given the major descrepancy between Sagar and Valmiki, I did find it disappointing that people would base their opinions on the former, rather than the latter.

Originally posted by: Chandraketu

It would be the first, if not only, instance of any god/ess having multiple incarnations simultaneously: e.g. Parashuram's avatar ended when Rama's began. I always read that Rukmini was the incarnation of Lakshmi - this is the first time I'm reading that about Draupadi. That actually would raise a different question, actually 2 -

1. Are God/desses capable of cloning themselves as mutiple avatars at the same time?

Originally posted by: Chandraketu

I guess we have different definitions of what constitutes 'mistakes'. To me, if I neglected to pick my kid up after school because I thought my wife was going to, that would be a mistake. In that sort of a situation, yes, I'd repent and want to be forgiven.

However, if I was the cause of something major, like someone's death, or untold suffering to somebody else, let alone Gods, I wouldn't forgive myself nor deserve to be forgiven. Sure, forgiveness is a great quality, but it's generally earned after the sinner has suffered the consequences for the sin. Otherwise, people guilty of major crimes would just have to apologize, and that would be the end of the story. Forgiveness does not imply that the person being forgiven doesn't face any consequences. It definitely does not mean that the person being forgiven should be rewarded for it, which is what happened here.

In this epic, both Vali & Ravan were responsible for the separation of a husband from his wife, and both paid for it with their lives, and were then forgiven. The people of Ayodhya were guilty of the same crime, yet not only were they not punished, but at the end of the day, they got to go in their mortal forms to Vaikuntha.

If only Sita and Lakshman were as lucky.