This is not the same SKR which we loved

First Previous

Page

Next Last

Frequent Posters

shruthiravi

@shruthiravi

Stunner

+ 2

Posted: 9 years ago

#121

Though I have not read Patnaik's books , I have read his takes on mytho characters on his page. I had found them quite fascinating, intriguing.

Have not read Anand Neelakantan so cannot say anything about the books.

Coming to Bali the best I could understand why Ram did what he did was because Bali had a boon. A necklace from Indra which made him take half the power of his opponent in direct battle. So it was literally impossible to kill bali in direct combat.

And Bali used this power for adharma, he not only exiled Sugreeva for a crime he didn't commit but also misbehaved with Ruma Sugreeva's wife.

Hence Ram had to kill him from behind for the protection of dharma. When power is used for adharma, that power will be taken through adarma only.

We see it very well in Kurushetra war.

Quote

JAYASHREE

@jayvenk

Rocker

Posted: 9 years ago

#122

I think Vali was the only one who could kill ravan!!???

Quote

Looks like you are new here. Register for free, learn and contribute.

Ramyalaxmi

@Ramyalaxmi

Dazzler

Posted: 9 years ago

#123

@Shruthi: Yes, Vali had the boon that is why Ravan got defeated. But Ram stood beside (next to Sugriva) and not behind. This is clearly misinterpreted in Kambar Ramayan as far as I know.

Quote

Justlikethat1

@Justlikethat1

Sparkler

+ 2

Posted: 9 years ago

#124

Vaali defeated Raavan once and from then on they declared not to fight each other. Raavan cannot be killed and vaali would not loose and hence they stopped the fight after sometime.

Ram explains to vaali that what he didand how he killed vaali was not adharm as per the laws of that time. Vaali was a vaanar and Ram had no personal fight with vaali. Ram did not have to fight him face to face. This was not a combat.

Furthermore as the representative of the ruler of Ayodhya he had every right to instill dharma on all the land that came under Ayodhya, the implication being that even the southern parts were under Ayodhya at that time.

Quote

sugunmanas

@lifeiscrazy

Dazzler

+ 2

Posted: 9 years ago

#125

hey all didi's 😃

thank u for bringing up a nice discussion😃

its really informative

happy to have u all on this thread and meeting u all on this forum

@sruthiravi @jayvenk @ramyalakshmi😃

Edited by sugunmanas - 9 years ago

Quote

Ramyalaxmi

@Ramyalaxmi

Dazzler

Posted: 9 years ago

#126

Originally posted by: jayvenk
I think Vali was the only one who could kill ravan!!???

Quite possible but certainly not the only one. Ravan while asking the boon he didn't include manush and vanara in the list who should not kill him.
Ravan was actually over-confident about his talent over manush and vanara