Question:
Ramayana - Hinduism - Is it true..............?
2012-04-06 23:57:32 UTC
Rama fought with Vaali. Vaali is in the death bed. Vaali asks Rama several reasons for the fight he made against him. One of the questions vaali asked Rama is this:

''Why you impose your rules on me''?

Is it true ? Was Vaali asked this question? please answer.
Twelve answers:
2012-04-08 07:53:15 UTC
Straight and short answer to your question is YES ! it is true that Vaali asked this question to Lord Rama.
RADHA
2012-04-09 03:26:01 UTC
I think you wanted to ask Why Vaali asked this question instead of Was Vali asked this question .



Ans----Vaali fell on the ground and it was only then that he saw Rama standing behind the tree. He asked Sri Rama "What makes Sugreev your beloved friend and me your enemy? For what reason, O Lord you killed me?". Sri Rama replied ""O fool Vaali, the wife of younger brother is considered as a sister and the wife of son is considered like own daughter. There is no sin in killing such a person who lears the wife of his younger brother or son." Then Sri Rama instructed Sugreeva to perform the last rites of his brother. Sri Rama also instructed Laxmana to crown Sugreeva as the king of Pampapuri and Angad, the son of Vaali as the heir to the throne.
TIME TRAVELER.
2012-04-08 04:26:55 UTC
Hi Matangi Rani what happens to your name.





https://answersrip.com/question/index?qid=20110830024323AAwWkiQ



What is the spiritual meaning of Matangi Rani?

What do you know about Matangi Rani?



Ram didn't fight with Vaali,Since Vaali has Received a boon of "Gaining half the power of the opponent who faces him before" So Rama Killed him From the back.



Vali ask Rama, “What was my crime?”



Rama replied, “The younger brother should be treated like a son. Even if he made a mistake you should forgive him, especially when he promised to respect you for your whole life.”



“Even if I committed a crime with my brother, whatright do you have to kill me?” returned Vali.



“I have been given authority by the King of Kosala, my brother King Bharata, to travel the earth to spread righteousness and punish evils,” said Rama calmly.



“I was fighting with some other person and was not careful enough when you shot me. In the end, Rama, you have taken the life of a person who had done you no wrong,” said Vali.



At this Rama stated, “You are correct. Killing a person is wrong. But all of the gods and the kings have hunted game in the past for sport, and killing those creatures is not wrong. Vali, though your race is brilliant, it does not change the fact that you are a race of monkeys and in principle could also be kept in the category of deers. A hunting king does not care whether the deer was careful or not.”



Vali accepted Rama’s answers and then apologized to him for even questioning the great Rama.
Tulips
2012-04-09 11:13:25 UTC
LOL i am 100% sure the vali referred here is Mathangi, who asked this question from Great Ape.



It is kaliyuga so vali has killed rama
PRATAP S
2012-04-07 07:22:18 UTC
All the religious books are 'framed' to make a helthy social group of persons. Who are living together. The authenticity of the happenings can not be prooved as lacs of years have been passed.

Even though, It is good to obey these books. But criticism of everything is always there. Nothing is perfect in this world.

If u put a load on a horse. People will say: U r cruel. If u put that load on you..then u r ......



Don't go deep in the ancient books or in the talks of gurus...Whatever u feel gud just take those things/ lifestyle. lv the rest.

Gud luck..
?
2012-04-08 07:22:17 UTC
It is True. In the Hindu epic Ramayana, the vanara Vali was king of Kishkindha, a son of Indra and the elder brother of Sugriva. He was killed by Rama, an Avatar of Vishnu.



It is said in the Ramayana that Vali was very brave and courageous. Before dawn he used to go from the Eastern coast of sea to the Western coast and from the Northern coast of the sea to the Southern coast to pay his homage to Surya - the sun-god. He was so brave and powerful that on his way to pay homage to Surya, he used to toss the mountain peaks upward and catch them as if they were play balls. Also after completing the tedious task of paying homage to the sun god in all the four directions, when he used to return to Kishkindha he does not feel any tiredness



Vali had been known as a good and pious vanara-king, but had been too outraged to heed his brother Sugriva after his brother had sealed the entrance to a cave in which Vali was fighting a rakshasa named Mayavi. Sugriva had mistaken the blood flowing out of the cave to be his brother's, blocked the entrance to the cave with a boulder and left for Kishkindha, assuming that his brother was dead. When Vali had emerged victorious over the rakshasa, he had found that the entrance to the cave was blocked. He journeyed back to kingdom to find Sugriva ruling in his place. Sugriva tried to explain the situation to Vali, but Vali, enraged, would not listen. Vali then nearly kills Sugriva, except that Sugriva was able to escape Vali's grasp. Sugriva barely escaped from the kingdom. When Vali chased Sugriva out of his kingdom, he also claimed Sugriva's main wife, Ruma. Sugriva fled into the forest where he eventually meets Rama and Lakshmana.



Tara is entered here. She is the granddaughter of Brihaspati, the Jupiter and wife of Vali and she is one of the exemplary females in this epic. She advises Vali not to confront Sugreeva, as long as Rama stands guard to him.



Rama fought and put Vaali in the death bed.Vaali asks ''Oh, Rama, you took birth, not so, emerged as an incarnation in Raghava's dynasty, artham purposefully... abhavya san 'though cruel...' bhavya ruupena paridhaavasi, kim? you are moving about with a superficial aspect of a morally sagacious person, or what? No definitely. kruura karma samaacaret? or did you do a wrongdoing in killing me? Not so.



If it is said that you are an incarnate on earth, there cannot be duality in your inner aspect or outer aspect. YOU CAN NOT HAVE A CRUEL HEART WITH A CHARMING FACE OF A PRINCE when you alone are the protector of Universe. Equally, taking birth in Raghava-s lineage you cannot move about with a sagely appearance and go on killing beings like me. So, there shall be some purpose in killing me. artham kim 'what is that purpose...'



"We as animals live in forests while you are city dwellers, we live by eating fruits and tubers while you enjoy feasts and banquets, our nature is such to kill and get killed, thus you and me have no correlation. And you, even if you are a man and a prince for humans, you resorted to this animalistic way of killing me lying in the wait, thus your action is worse than that of an animal, if not subhuman or un-princely.



The other argument of Vali is like this: 'We are animals living in forests and unlike elephants, horses and the like, we are not even fit to render service to mankind, doing which those animals enjoy high grade foods than us, while we are destined to eat fruits and tubers. When there is no rapport between you humans and we monkeys, and then there can be no enmity between you and me, because enmity crops up only when there is a correlation. Apart from this, I am no equal of yours, but inferior and worthless vanara, and hence your killing me is only to give me salvation.'



'There appears to be no reason as to why a five-nailed animal like me is to be killed, when there is no reason for political, religious, hunting, or food purposes.



"A regicide, a Brahman-cide, a cow-slayer, a thief, an inveterate killer, an atheist, and an younger brother who marries before his elder, all of them will go to hell. A slander-monger, skinflint, friend-killer and one who makes love with his teacher's wife, they all go to the worlds of evil-souls, no doubt about it.



"My skin is unwearable, holy people forbid my hair and bones, and uneatable is my meat for your kind of reputable people.



Though Rama give answers to Vali and justifies the killing, but the questions raised Vaali in his death-bed have an excellent and very meaningful.



=====

Trisha

======
°ⓐⓟⓔ°
2012-04-07 09:10:34 UTC
The killing of Vaali is pure cheating by Rama. For selfish interests... he kills a Vanara by hiding and shooting arrow from behind. Justification to killing Vaali is given by religious people who made Ramayana their base text book. Rama was not God...He was the Prince of Ayodhya..Can you believe that God with so much of powers cannot find the difference between Vaali and Sugreeva...so he asks Sugreeva to wear a garland. And further...he has to kill a lower creature by hiding and shooting an arrow from behind. He did all this for selfish interest only...ie...help of Sugreeva to find Sita. This is exactly the great monologue of Vaali in his death bed...read the content in the link...



http://www.valmikiramayan.net/kishkindha/sarga17/kishkindha_17_prose.htm



Vali challenges and questions Rama with 13 reasons for his henious act....

1] By killing one who is facing away, what worth is achieved by you.

2] You have not punished the wrongdoer ?

3] Killed one who is combating with another and an unvigilant one?

4] In your country or city I did no misdeed.

5] Non-guilty being is hurt.

6] Fruits, tuber eating being is killed.

7] No dispute of land, gold or silver.

8] You primary aspiration is to kill without probing into good or bad.

9] How do you face criticism by scholars.

10] Unnecessary killers are hell-goers.

11] Un-wearable is my skin uneatable is my flesh.

12] Five kinds of five-nailed animals are usable by humans, he is not one of them.

13] I would have brought back Maithili in one day.



To all these questions...Rama answers...in the next chapter...which i think is unacceptable to human beings and apes with a heart and common sense...but acceptable only to dumb-witted Vaishnav freaks and religious extremists...



Edited...

When India and Pakistan are having a one to one war...How would it feel...if China drops a nuclear bomb on India...Now since China is more dominant...and the one who is victorious always key in writing the history of what happened...People should use their common sense than blindly accepting what is written in age old books...reading it 100 times...and saying that they will get Moksha....if such stories like Vaalivadham are read or heard...Killing of Vaali is unjustified....whatever or whoever says here that it is a justified act....i can never agree...to innocent killing....Mahabharata is atleast a war...But what is this? A Kshatriya prince...hiding and killing a Vanara !!
 Anon
2012-04-07 11:45:57 UTC
Why are you asking these questions dear?....dont you really know the answers?



Anyway, read Kumaraa's answer here:



https://answersrip.com/question/index?qid=20080214093940AAjuBMV
2012-04-07 11:23:25 UTC
Ramayana was story written by imagination from a person who had no other business.
Proud Indian
2012-04-07 16:57:36 UTC
I will narrate the accusations of Vaali to Ram in the battle field :



On seeing the brave Vali fallen like that, who by now is like fire with extinguished tongues of flames, and who is seeing droopily, those two valiant brothers, Rama and Lakshmana, neared him with due honour.



On seeing Rama and the great mighty Lakshmana as well, he who fell to ground flatly hurt by arrow, and whose energy and lives are trifling and vigour trivialised thereby, that Vali spoke these sarcastic words in his proper pride to Rama, who is taking pride in this conflict as a victor, which words at the same time have meaning, politeness, and self-righteousness.



"You are a renowned prince with pleasing looks but, which kind of death I am getting now, that too when I was in the commotion of conflict with another, alas, that ignoble death is owing to you, and what merit is achieved by you in this undertaking of yours to kill someone who is facing away from you.



"To be able to control senses and will, forgiveness, conscientiousness, resoluteness, truthfulness, and adventurousness, oh, king, are the aptitudes of a king, and even punishing the wrongdoers, too. Concluding that those kingly characteristics will be obtainable in you, and even judging by the noble dynasty of yours, I have confronted Sugreeva though Tara dissuaded me.



"When you have not appeared before me when I confronted Sugreeva my concept was, 'it will be inapt of Rama to hurt me while I am combating with another combatant, besides, when I will be unvigilant in that fight� Not known that your soul is put to death, not known that you are the unrighteous flag bearer of righteousness, to me not known that you are insidious like straw covered well.



"I have no knowledge that you are a sinner, one in the garb of a benign soul, and explicitly mantled under the garb of probity like ash covered fire.



"I am non-guilty as I have not committed any misdeed either in your country or in your city, nor I have taunted you; I am a vanara subsisting on fruits and tubers and always moving in forests alone; such as I am, what made you to torture me when I was not combating with you en face, furthermore, when I was involved with another?



"You are renowned to be a prince with charming looks, oh, king, and indications agreeable to rectitude are also appearing on your body. Will anybody born in Kshatriya's family, a learned one in Veda-s, thereby who is rid of ambiguities with respect to right and wrong, and who is cloaked in an air of probity, execute such a ruthless deed like this? Though born in Raghava's dynasty and renowned as a moralist you are actually amoral, and for what purpose you run around with this moral aspect?

_________________________________________________________

Why a Bajrangi Odam Lulli should take pride in getting killed his ancestor ? Is it not a betrayal to his Bajrangi community ? If Odam Lulli is not a Bajrangi, then let him show his true color by bringing the exact version of Ramayan's Kishkindiya Chapter, in his own words. It is a challenge to him, if he claims not to learn Hinduism from others ... Bajrangis should keep their tails down instead of their Thumbs...

_________________________________________________________



"We as animals live in forests while you are city dwellers, we live by eating fruits and tubers while you enjoy feasts and banquets, our nature is such to kill and get killed, thus you and me have no correlation. And you, even if you are a man and a prince for humans, you resorted to this animalistic way of killing me lying in the wait, thus your action is worse than that of an animal, if not subhuman or un-princely.



"Territory, gold, and silver will be the causes while counteracting somebody, in that case, by what you are decoyed into these forests of mine or in the fruits of mine. "In the pairs of propriety and compliance, punishment and pardoning, no admixture is exercised in kingcraft, for the kings do not conduct themselves volitionally. "But, to you your self-interests are primary, and you are a wrathful, capricious, contriver of kingcraft, and an impetuous shooting-happy archer. Oh, king, you have no devotion to probity, nor your mind is firm about material gains, but as a free-willed one you are distracted by senses.

"How you are answerable to gentlemen, Rama, when you have done this detestable deed of killing an unoffending one like me with your arrow?



"A regicide, a Brahman-cide, a cow-slayer, a thief, an inveterate killer, an atheist, and an younger brother who marries before his elder, all of them will go to hell. A slander-monger, skinflint, friend-killer and one who makes love with his teacher's wife, they all go to the worlds of evil-souls, no doubt about it. "How are you borne to that great-souled Dasharatha when you are artful, felonious, knavish, disposed to a false modesty subconsciously, and an evildoer?



Incomplete.....
Truth
2012-04-07 07:35:15 UTC
they are moral stories, theams are imoprtant not the charectes.

2012-04-07 06:59:25 UTC
No, because fictional characters can't talk.


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...