MUFC. Gamer. Extreme Metal.
Joined July 2020
- Tweets125K
- Following847
- Followers2.7K
- Likes73.7K
This useless movie has sprouted too many clowns who have no understanding of shAstra and think they can read ithihAsa like comic books.
What nonsense are you spouting, Krishna is paramAtma. Him being born does not mean he comes under karma - अवजानन्ति मां मूढा मानुषीं तनुमाश्रितम्
Jara was his devotee. bhagavAn took an arrow to his heel precisely because he wanted to emulate how vAli died in that instance+
But the so is the original answer, the tweet in reply to it & your tweet in reply to reply
Krishna did suffer karmic consequence for killing of vali - as said by many gurus & texts
But he is also supreme Brahman not bound by laws of karma teapaw.org/crazy__shikhu/status/2…
sugrIva also took vAli's wife (who is like a mother to him) after his death. Yet he wasn't punished whereas rAma cites this as a reason for vAli's punishment.
Because sugrIva had surrendered to lakShmaNa and hence was pardoned, though rAma was angered about it+
Now your answer is also correct & is given by many gurus & probably is mentioned in other Hindu texts also. How vali was a bad brother who refused his brother's surrender & even took his wife.
teapaw.org/DefiledGod/status/2119…
teapaw.org/M_Khuman33/status/2118…
Note that even the separation/abduction of sIta could have been avoided if vAli had killed rAvaNa when he had the opportunity (his duty as an upAsaka and he was capable). Instead he befriended rAvaNa.
Thus, even the absence of sIta leading to his death was his own fault.
Rama has a guNa of giving a 100 unimportant reasons for his actions, while embedding the real reason somewhere in between.
The only reason he killed vAli is mentioned by vAli himself amidst everything- सुग्रीवेण सह भ्राता द्वन्द्व युद्धम् उपागतम्+
Well, that is exactly what would have happened if sIta had been with him. She never allows him to kill anyone. But she was not there and hence he was ruthless!
Still, it is to be noted that mahAlakShmI always resides on his chest+
Lakshmana put Rama in a spot. By saying he would punish Dasharatha, he gave Rama a choice - "If you believe your father deserves naraka, then I am justified in punishing him your brother will become a killer of your father. Or, you can see him as righteous & give him svarga"+
As Rama did not want his own brother to kill his father, he had to argue in favor of Dasharatha, thus ensuring his eligibility for svarga//
Lakshmana is Adi Shesha, who was praised by Krishna as never ever giving way to anger - अरोषणो हि धर्मात्मा सततं धर्मवत्सलः (~ shalyaparva)
He worships Bhu Devi and has her quality of kShamA (endurance). He was never angry with Dasharatha+
Lakshmana knew that the King had committed the blunder of suspecting Bharata. In addition, Dasharatha had given priority to sAmAnya dharma over vishesha dharma by favoring Kaikeyi's boons over Rama.
All this would make him fit for naraka only when he died+
About time they stop making movies about Rama, Krishna, Shiva, Durga, Kali etc. No actor can portray them, much less bad faith actors.
If you really want it, animation is an option. But even then, proper scholars should be consulted to avoid butchering shAstra.
This manipulated movie in the name of #Ramayana deserves to be avoided by audience and it should be disaster on box-office.
Didn't expect this from @malhotra_namit and @niteshtiwari22