One honest question?

[veerigadu]

16 minutes ago, Vaampire said:

Ramayanam motham chadivinavallu post seetha devi going with budevi, rama’s administration was debacle antaru. 

Yes Rama was human too and he lost it after a while. But that’s only at the end of his administration. For the major part, he was a great king and a wonderful prince.

[veerigadu]

4 hours ago, hyperbole said:

Naku ippatiki Adam kanidi why Rama is over looked even after he abandoned Sita after returning to Ayodya, Was he excessively reputation-conscious? 

like Karuna, Ravana is also a layered character, Mahadev TV serial la they tried unravel multiple layers of Ravana, naku chala interesting character anipichindi, why are we made to hate Ravana so much ani? he acts in anger because Rama hurt his sister, he didn’t touch Sita, clash of egos  and war I get it but that is on a personal level not that he killed thousands of Hindus(he is also a hindu/brahaman) for no reason. There are many rakshasas who just committed sin for no reason yet their defeat is not celebrated like Ravana’s

Ravana is half brahmin and half rakshasaaa. His father was a Rishi and mother was a demon. He has a blend of both positives and negatives.

Laxmana embarrassed surpanakaa. It was Not Rama. 

He could have went one on one with Rama if he was so offended. Instead he took a wrong route of stealing somebody’s wife.  Stealing a married women against her will is a sin. 
 

He was also a serial womanizer and he had camaraderie of big time rakhasaas. Ravana indulged in many orgies with multiple women ani Ramayana lo chala descriptions unnayiii
 

Ravana is great disciple of lord shiva. But he was no match to lord Vishnu. For that matter he even lost a battle with monkey king  vali, karthyaveeryarjunuduuu and his own father in law mayasuraa.  So he lost multiple battles in his lifetime 

[hyperbole]

29 minutes ago, Vaampire said:

Ramayanam motham chadivinavallu post seetha devi going with budevi, rama’s administration was debacle antaru. 

Depression??  he didn’t want to abandon but still abandoned his family. Personally I feel some of this is written or depict or stereotype women to live a certain way, Man is always right and woman should obey her man.

Ethical crisis 

If Rama considered Sita pure, why did he abandon her? Because the ethical dilemma confronting him didn’t seem amenable to any other solution.

We need to see the actions of characters in the epics in the light of the prevailing culture and its cherished values. The Ramayana depicts a deeply spiritual culture. Therein, people saw success not just in terms of prosperity in this world, but also in terms of the spirituality cultivated during one’s journey through this world. Cultivating spirituality, in its highest sense, meant developing devotion to the source of everything, God, and harmonizing one’s whole life accordingly. In such a culture, all relations and positions were seen as opportunities for sacred service, service to God and to others in relationship with him. One service was the service of exemplifying detachment, especially from things that came in the way of one’s spiritual growth.

Most people are attached materially to their relations and positions. Such attachments can keep them alienated from God, who is the ultimate provider of everything including family members and who is the ultimate shelter after death, when all family members are left behind. Materially attached people are naturally attracted to those with lavish material assets. The person with the most impressive material assets is usually the king. If the king demonstrates detachment by not letting material things come in the way of spiritual cultivation, then the king’s example forcefully edifies citizens about the importance of life’s spiritual side. So, integral to the king’s duty was the duty of demonstrating to his citizens that worldly attachments couldn’t sway him from his spiritual dharma. This duty conflicted with Rama’s duty as a husband.

When Rama heard the accusation leveled against Sita, he was faced with an ethical dilemma. Whereas a moral dilemma confronts us with two choices, one moral and the other immoral, an ethical dilemma confronts us with two choices, both moral. For resolving an ethical dilemma, we need to discern the higher moral principle and harmonize the lower moral principle as much as possible. Rama’s dilemma was ethical because his duty as a king conflicted with his duty as a husband.

As a husband, he was dutybound to protect his wife. But as the king, he was dutybound to exemplify and teach detachment to his citizens. If his citizens felt that he was so attached to Sita as to keep her despite her impurity, then they would, consciously or subconsciously, use Rama’s alleged attachment to rationalize their own attachments to unworthy things. Of course, Sita was not impure. She had not left Rama and gone to Ravana; Ravana had abducted her against her will. Because Ravana had been cursed to die if he ever violated a woman against her will, he had tried to gain Sita’s consent by alternately tempting and threatening her. She had heroically preserved her purity by spurning his temptations and braving his threats for an endlessly long year. Rama himself had no doubts about Sita’s purity. But anticipating people’s objections, he had prepared to address them. After the fall of Ravana in Lanka, when Sita was brought into his presence, he had her purity dramatically demonstrated through the test of fire. Moreover, after that test, the gods led by Brahma had certified Sita’s spotless character.

If despite all this, people were still questioning Sita’s purity, Rama felt that nothing would ever convince them. If he neglected such people and continued to live with Sita, he would appear attached. If he silenced them, he would come off as so blinded by attachment as to be vindictive. He felt that his duty as a king required him to show his detachment from Sita.

Exhibiting a stoic spirit of sacrifice, Rama deemed his duty as king more important than his duty as husband, and so sent Sita away to the forest. But he didn’t entirely neglect his duty as a husband; he did that duty too because the forsaken Sita was still in his kingdom and thus indirectly in his protection.

When the distraught Lakshmana informed Sita of Rama’s decision, she was devastated. But soon she regained her composure, understood her Lord’s heart and gracefully accepted her part in the heart-wrenching sacrifice that both of them had to be part of. She didn’t resent Rama and didn’t poison her sons against their father. She raised them lovingly, accepting with fortitude the role of a single mother that had been thrust on her.

Of course, she was not a single mother in the modern sense; she didn’t have to single-handedly earn a living and care for her children. After being forsaken, she lived in Valmiki’s hermitage, where the matronly female hermits took care of her and helped her to take care of her children.

It’s worth noting that banishment may not be the best word for describing Sita’s abandonment. Banishment implied being evicted from the kingdom into the forest – as had happened to Rama earlier in the Ramayana. Though Sita lived in the forest, she was still in Rama’s kingdom. She did not have to scour for food, clothing, shelter; these were arranged for in Valmiki’s hermitage.

[Spartan]

it started with mustache and beard... to...questioning character ... 

[hyperbole]

23 minutes ago, veerigadu said:

Ravana is half brahmin and half rakshasaaa. His father was a Rishi and mother was a demon. He has a blend of both positives and negatives.

Laxmana embarrassed surpanakaa. It was Not Rama. 

He could have went one on one with Rama if he was so offended. Instead he took a wrong route of stealing somebody’s wife.  Stealing a married women against her will is a sin. 
 

He was also a serial womanizer and he had camaraderie of big time rakhasaas. Ravana indulged in many orgies with multiple women ani Ramayana lo chala descriptions unnayiii
 

Ravana is great disciple of lord shiva. But he was no match to lord Vishnu. For that matter he even lost a battle with monkey king  vali, karthyaveeryarjunuduuu and his father in law mayasuraa.  So he lost multiple battles in his lifetime 

Sorry, Laxmana it is.

I agree it is morally wrong to steal Sita, Ravana had been cursed to die if he ever violated a woman against her will, that is the reason he had tried to gain Sita’s consent by alternately tempting and threatening her.

Alternatively not many know he is the grand son of Brahma, a great poet, veena player and greatest scientist of his time as per ramayana(puspak vimanam is his creation).

That’s what I am saying I am confused that the whole point of womenzing is contracdictary if he has such tenacity to please gods. His character potrail confuses like Thanos in avengers  For example:

 

Ravana performed an intense penance - tapasya - to Brahma, lasting several years. During his penance, Ravana chopped off his head 10 times as a sacrifice to appease Brahma. Each time he sliced his head off, a new head arose, thus enabling him to continue his penance. At last, Brahma, pleased with his austerity, appeared after Ravana's 10th decapitation and offered him a boon. Ravana asked for immortality, which Brahma refused of course, but gave him the celestial nectar of immortality, which we all know was stored under his navel.

Ravana's 10 heads symbolise the six Shastras and four Vedas, making him a great scholar and the most intelligent person of his time.

Namely:

Sankhyashastra (Mathematics)

Yog Shastra (Yoga as a way of life, meditation)

Nyayashastra (Law and administration)

Vaisheshik Shastra (Physics, astronomy, mechanics)

Purvamimansa (Philosophy, Justification)

Uttar Mimansa Shastra

Rigveda

Yajurveda

Samveda

Atharvaveda.

Ravana was a master in astrology, it is said that he broke one of Saturn’s arms, when Sani deva refused to be in a perfect position which would have made Meghnad immortal.

While Ravana was dying, Lakhsmana ran towards him so that he can learn the knowledge of diplomacy, since nobody in this planet had better knowledge and experience of administrative diplomacy over Ravana. His 10 heads represented a mammoth pool of knowledge and experience as a ruler, king and as a Brahman.

From another perspective, the 10 heads signify the 10 negative forms of love.

Ahamkara – Ego

Moha – Attachment

Krodha – Anger

Ghrina – Hatred

Paschataap – regret

Irshya – jealousy

Lobha – Greed

Kama – Lust

Jaddata – Insensitivity

Bhaya – Fear

[veerigadu]

3 hours ago, hyperbole said:

Sorry, Laxmana it is.

I agree it is morally wrong to steal Sita, Ravana had been cursed to die if he ever violated a woman against her will, that is the reason he had tried to gain Sita’s consent by alternately tempting and threatening her.

Alternatively not many know he is the grand son of Brahma, a great poet, veena player and greatest scientist of his time as per ramayana(puspak vimanam is his creation).

That’s what I am saying I am confused that the whole point of womenzing is contracdictary if he has such tenacity to please gods. His character potrail confuses like Thanos in avengers  For example:

 

Ravana performed an intense penance - tapasya - to Brahma, lasting several years. During his penance, Ravana chopped off his head 10 times as a sacrifice to appease Brahma. Each time he sliced his head off, a new head arose, thus enabling him to continue his penance. At last, Brahma, pleased with his austerity, appeared after Ravana's 10th decapitation and offered him a boon. Ravana asked for immortality, which Brahma refused of course, but gave him the celestial nectar of immortality, which we all know was stored under his navel.

Ravana's 10 heads symbolise the six Shastras and four Vedas, making him a great scholar and the most intelligent person of his time.

Namely:

Sankhyashastra (Mathematics)

Yog Shastra (Yoga as a way of life, meditation)

Nyayashastra (Law and administration)

Vaisheshik Shastra (Physics, astronomy, mechanics)

Purvamimansa (Philosophy, Justification)

Uttar Mimansa Shastra

Rigveda

Yajurveda

Samveda

Atharvaveda.

Ravana was a master in astrology, it is said that he broke one of Saturn’s arms, when Sani deva refused to be in a perfect position which would have made Meghnad immortal.

While Ravana was dying, Lakhsmana ran towards him so that he can learn the knowledge of diplomacy, since nobody in this planet had better knowledge and experience of administrative diplomacy over Ravana. His 10 heads represented a mammoth pool of knowledge and experience as a ruler, king and as a Brahman.

From another perspective, the 10 heads signify the 10 negative forms of love.

Ahamkara – Ego

Moha – Attachment

Krodha – Anger

Ghrina – Hatred

Paschataap – regret

Irshya – jealousy

Lobha – Greed

Kama – Lust

Jaddata – Insensitivity

Bhaya – Fear

He has many skills and talents. No doubt. I attribute all this to his family legacy,

Ravana has a strong genetic lineage. His father is a grandson of lord Brahma. Thus Ravana becomes great grandson of lord Brahma the creator himself. 

[veerigadu]

In conclusion you look at him from rakshasaaa standpoint and it baffles/confuses you to see all these talents in him. In reality, he is also a great grandson of Lord Brahma. He has direct lineage from creator himself. He is actually a black sheep in that noble family. If you look at his father and grand father they were great sages too. They had nothing pertaining to womanizing or war loving traits. Those kind of atrocities only started due to Demonic qualities of Ravana  @hyperbole