They should not change the truth - Page 5

Darshils,
Wow, Impressed with your knowledge, I bow my head.
I believe Ravan was religious and he prayed for Lord Shiva and so on but I do not agree that he was such a HERO that this people are trying to prove him.

This is the most interesting topic of conversation everyone seems to be having. Most people think of the Ram and Ravan in black and white terms...Ram good, Ravan bad. I don't think that is so. Ravan has always seemed as an intelligent and righteous man whose downfall ended being his own ego. I think what they've depicted in this serial is a different view at looking at things. Although Ravan stole Sita not anywhere is it written or implied that he forced himself on her. I think he had a code of honor even towards the end. If you look at the other side of things Ram also wasn't perfect. He also had some societal rules he had to follow, hence the agni-pariksha. I think they've done a great job with this serial. It makes you think outside the box.

Originally posted by: ppandey

This is the most interesting topic of conversation everyone seems to be having. Most people think of the Ram and Ravan in black and white terms...Ram good, Ravan bad. I don't think that is so. Ravan has always seemed as an intelligent and righteous man whose downfall ended being his own ego. I think what they've depicted in this serial is a different view at looking at things. Although Ravan stole Sita not anywhere is it written or implied that he forced himself on her. I think he had a code of honor even towards the end. If you look at the other side of things Ram also wasn't perfect. He also had some societal rules he had to follow, hence the agni-pariksha. I think they've done a great job with this serial. It makes you think outside the box.

I liked what u said of Ravan... I cannot say wether Ravan was Black or White (perhaps he is a mixture of both), but Ram was certainly Complete, Perfect, White.. that i can gaurantee.. I can remove all your doubts on Ram (if you are willing to listen not with a set mind but with an open mind)... but as u talked of the 'agni-pariksha' let me tell u a few things... There are 3 main reasons why people have misunderstood this scene in teh Ramayana... 1. Not knowing the complete story. 2. Language missused in context 3. Being over-sensitive (read belwo to get clearer view).

1. if u read the Ramayana, before Ravan abducted Sita, Ram had called upon Agni Dev (god of fire) to protect the 'mool-swarup' or main form of Sita.. what was left now was Sita's shadow/delusion (and that is why Sita is reffered to as Maya- NB.. this is not bad, there are two kinds of Maya; Avidya Maya is what causes bandhan/'moh'/attachment, the other can lead u to the lord's feet).... Ravan had only stolen Sita's shadow. As Bhagwaan Ram was doing a Leela/play the shadow was of more use in this stage of the story... between.. Ravan couldnt have even touched Sita's mool-swarup.. Sita is a Sati (very chaste/pure woman) and even touching her would have killed Ravan..... THEN, when Ravan was killed, Sita's shadow wasnt of any use, now Instead of Maya, Ram wanted to propose Bhakti (main form of Sita) as the Queen of Ayodhya to settle Ram Rajya... And in order to do this, Ram had to ask Sita to cross a a light of fire... Laxman then did revolt against Ram thinking that Ram wanted to test Sita's chastisity.. but Ram told Laxman (who was unaware of Ram's Lila (of using Sitas shadow and keeping the main form with Agni Dev)).. and then Laxman agreed....
Now let me ask u. If you are a doctor and thus in your hospital u wear a white coat.. when u return home, do u still where the white coat.. NO. The white coat is for use in the hospital, and normal clothes are for use elsewhere... similarly, Sita wore the coat of Maya/shadow for going to Lanka (to treat Ravan of his ego).. when she return from Lanka (the hospital), the coat is of no use, and thats why she changes to her mool-swarup (naturel form)!!!

2. I dont even know why we call it 'agni pariksha'... this is misusing of words at its best... let me explian to u: Ram had only asked Sita to cross the fire (not any sort of pariksha)... but then as a form of colloquilism/saying (muhavara), people started saying that 'after killing Ravan (complete a great challenge), Sita had to cross the fire (that is had to overcome a greater challenge.. and yes challenge = test = pariksha)... and thats how the word 'agni-pariksha' or 'fire-testament' came about.... It wasnt even a pariksha, but people misused the context and this was the result

3. Lets assume (which is not true) that Sita was actually tested for by Ram. Lets say there has been a murder in ur workplace and the cops have been called in.. if the cops interrogate with u, does that mean that u are one of the murderers?? NO!!! A person who is full in truth is never afraid of anything... then why the fuss!! Ram knew Sita is full of truth, so did Sita herself.. and thats why Sita never said anything against Ram or complained of anybody when she had to walk across the fire...

Mate, whenever you want to know something, try and aim for the complete view of it. It is high time that we ourselves read the scriptures so that we don't have to believe what others are saying... this is the best way of being sure... Also Ravan was certainly a strong, intelligent and great Guru bhakt (Shankar was his guru).... but his fall was because of his ego (as u said)... and not only that... even if he didnt have ego he would have fallen because he was born due to a shrap/curse!! Jay-Vijay were cursed by SanatKumar, King Pratapbhanu was cursed by Brahmans and this resulted in Ravan's birth... Ram came to free Ravan from his cycle of births (as he (Vishnu) promised Jay-Vijay to do so!))

Thanks for reading... I am seeing that my posts are getting longer and longer haha.. sorry for using ur time.. but u see, it is important to get right to the bottom (which i try to do) so that the complete picture can be seen!
|| RAM ||

One more thing.. As you (ppandey) have said ...He also had some societal rules he had to follow.....
By doing so he is proving that eventhough he is god, he did not cross limit and lived normal life according to societal rules. On other side Ravan corssed each and every limit and try to prove that he is powerful, he is the only guy who cared for people.

Hey Darshil, if its not too much trouble you should also share the story of Ravan's birth, why it was done so people can get clear picture on that side as well. So far they have not showed the real reason for Ravan's birth either.

Darshills, there's really no reason to get defensive.

"Mate, whenever you want to know something, try and aim for the complete view of it. It is high time that we ourselves read the scriptures so that we don't have to believe what others are saying... this is the best way of being sure..."

I'm not discounting what you say, but don't you think everyone interprets what they read in a different manner?

About your 3rd statement: "Lets assume (which is not true) that Sita was actually tested for by Ram. Lets say there has been a murder in ur workplace and the cops have been called in.. if the cops interrogate with u, does that mean that u are one of the murderers?? NO!!! A person who is full in truth is never afraid of anything... then why the fuss!!"

Here we're not talking about random people, or cops, as you use in your example but her husband. It's a question of trust.

I'm also curoius to why she had to go through a 2nd agni-pariksha. Why did she go back into the earth instead of going through with it?

Originally posted by: ppandey

Darshills, there's really no reason to get defensive.
Here we're not talking about random people, or cops, as you use in your example but her husband. It's a question of trust.

I'm also curoius to why she had to go through a 2nd agni-pariksha. Why did she go back into the earth instead of going through with it?

Hi, I will post the story behind the birth of Ravan soon... there are 4 reasons (all of which are due to curses).. i'll go through them in detail soon (it is lengthy)..

Regarding the question of trust. If Ram didnt trust Sita, why he have gone to Lanka after taking so much trouble anyways.. I never thought that I would have to write this that Ram trusted Sita..
Lets look at the Ram Charit Manas:

When Bhagvaan Ram asked Vibhishan to bring Sita on foot from Lanka cleansed and dressed by the Rakshasis of Lanka, all monkeys and bears in the clan of Ram wanted to see her.. but the guards won't let any of these see Ma Sita. Then Ram told the guards, "Dekhehu Kapi Janani ki Nai". Ram told the guards, let the monkeys (Kapi) see Sita as their Janani (mother from whose womb u r born)... If Ram didnt trust Sita, he would have never allowed even the monkeys to see her.. Right? Well, a person who doesn't trust his wife would protect her from the eyes of everyone...

Then "Sita Pratham Anal Mahu Rakhi | Pragat Kinha Chah Antar Sakhi || Tehi Karan Karunanidhi Kahe Kachuk Durbaad |" Sita had been previously lodged safely in fire before Ravan had stolen her shadow... Rama (the inner witness of all) now sought to bring her (Sita) back to light. Tulsi says 'Tehi Karan Karunanidhi Kahe .." Tehi Karan means because of that reason. There was no other reason (eg. distrust in Sita) to set the fire and let Sita walk across it accept to bring the Real Sita (and burn the shadow of Sita)...

When Sita was about to go in the fire how does she feel? 'Pavak Prabal dekhi Vaidehi, Hridaya Harash Nahi Bhay Kachu Tehi'... When Sita (Vaidehi) saw the blazzing fire, she rejoiced at heart... she wasnt afraid or saddned by Ram's words or questioned Ram's trust for her.. because she knew that Ram asked her to do this to get her original and true form... Tulsidas truly says "Prabhu Charit Kahu Na Lakhe Nabh Sur Sidh Muni Dekhahi Khare. Dhari Roop Pavak Pani gahi shri satya shruti jag bidit jo|" Meaning: No one could know the secret of the Lord's (Ram's) doing ; even the gods, sages stood gazing in the air. As Sita walked through the fire, her shadow form was consumed in the balzing fire. Then, the Fire assumed a bodily form and taking by the hand the real Sri (Sita), presented Goddess Indira (Sita/Lakshmi) to Lord Vishnu (Ram).... Hopefully now u see the secret of teh Lord's doing...

Secondly u stated the 2nd agni-pariksha and Sita going back to the earth... The second agni-pariksha was NOT conducted by Ram, but by the people of Ayodhya. Ram was a king of the people and thus had to let the people do what they wanted. He had full faith and trust in Sita. This is why it is called Ram Rajya, the king did what the people wanted even though he had to give an agni-pariksha of his wife.. Plus Sita Ma was fully faithfull, so the fire wouldn't do anything to her... (I havent quoted because the Ramchairtmanas doesnt go on to the 2nd agni-pariksha as Tulsi only likes topics of good dialogue and not of fights/issues taht is durvad, apvad and vivad...).

Sita had to go back to earth because she was born from the earth. Ram and Sita are bhagvaan right? If Sita didnt go back tothe earth, Ram and Sita would hve had to live forever on earth!! They cannot die (as they are gods).. so they have to go back from where they came... Sita came from the earth and thus went back through the earth.. The going back to earth scene is a way of completing the birth of Ram and Sita..

I will write down the story of Ravans birth very soon... it is long (as there are 4 reasons... all of which are due to curses..)
Just to jot down a briefing... Ravan was born becuase:
1. of rebirth.. previosuly he was Jalandhar (a demon).. and was born due to a curse from his wife!
2. a curse from Narad to one of Shankars gan (student/follower) as he poked fun at and made public fun of Narad
3. a curse by many Rishis (collectively) to King Pratapbhanu... as the king (without knowing) fed MEAT to the Rishis (and this also goes in fact my point that Rishis dont eat meat)
4. a curse to Jay (and Vijaya) by the Sanat Kumars as they didnt allow them to enter the abode of Vishnu... (Vijaya was born as Kumbhkaran)..

|| RAM ||

Hey Darshil... You do impress the living daylights out of me....How come you have so much info ??? is it all because you read the Ramchritra Manas...or you are among people who are in a temple envoironment ???

Thanks a ton !!! I absolutely love reading your posts & Look forward to them :) 👍🏼 😎 Edited by thall - 17 years ago

Wasnt there some curse on Lord Vishny & Laxmi ? That they will have to go on earth and they will not be able to stay together and enjoy married life that is why Sita was kidnaped, had to go to Valmiki rishi's ashram and at the end went into earth living Ram behind.

Mr. ppandey,
Everyone has diffrent opinion. You can think whatever you want. The explaination by Darshil do not count getting defensive, it is called sharing the knowledge and educating ppl about the reality.

Mainkaun,

"Mr. ppandey,
Everyone has diffrent opinion. You can think whatever you want. The explaination by Darshil do not count getting defensive, it is called sharing the knowledge and educating ppl about the reality."

I think you're misconstruing what I am trying to get at. I am not discounting Darshils' knowledge or his generosity at sharing it. In fact I am very impressed with what he knows. My point is just that there are many facets of reality. For example, I can read the same book you are reading and get a different meaning out of it. My whole reason for reading this set of posts was the title you gave it "They should not change the truth". You're right when you say everyone has a different opinion and I can think whatever I want. I definitely will think what I want but not by being ignorant of all information out there. That's why I enjoyed reading Darshils' comments so much. Which brings me back to square one. There are some basic parameters which are the same throughout India however, many different interpretations can be made from those parameters. You shouldn't discount someone's opinion without knowing what reasoning he has behind it.

This conversation can go on forever. I might be able to make you see my point of view or you may be able to help me understand yours. That actually doesn't matter. I just like seeing the reasoning behind everything. I don't take things at face value and I like to argue. I mean no offense when I give my opinion.

If I wrote Darshils' comment was defensive then that's the way I read part that of his comment that I quoted. No more no less.

Capish? I hope this time that I stated everything with more clarity. All information that you are giving out about this story is more than welcome. It's fun to read!

Mr. ppandey,
I was talking in reference to your comment :

"Darshills, there's really no reason to get defensive."

Again no offense if I misunderstood this line. Also do not just argue because you like to argue. Once in a while its ok to accept & agree with others. If I want to know other's view/reasoning then I would ask rather then arguing, but that's me. Again no offense. Sorry if I created misunderstanding, didn't mean it.