rama the bebevolent monarch

[Guest guest]

dear ramabhakthas,

there was a recent article by one of our respected colleagues-despot or

democrat.This articles is based on a wrong premise.A monarch-not elected by

public- can be benvolent or otherwise need not be a democrat in the true sense

of the word..Valmiki wished to convey to readers of a future date as to how

different people reacted to vibishana--out of fear. friendship,guilt ,precaution

etc.Sugreeva was the least qualifie of the lot.to argue against vibishana.Sri

Rama allowed his followers to vent their feelings and took a decision which was

perhaps preordained by the Paramathman.This perhaps is another instance of his

xowlabya. A few of our readers-who are in the borderline- may perhaps sieze to

be ramabhkatha after reading this article.

It is defenitely more difficult to convince this generation Ramas decision to

ban Sita who was pregnant.Why did valmiki wait till this stage was reached?

Valmiki ,a genious of a writer,author and enlightened soul who could read the

futute could have descrbed vali vada aand sitas banishment differently so that

future generations would not be making atheistic remarks.The killing of the

sudra who practised vedic rites is also a case of extreme unwarranted

punishment.

Is it likely that the uthra kanda is not valmikis bud added on through ages?

May i be excused for these frank and perhaps ignorant remarks.

Sri Narayan Desikaya Namah.

aditen dasn-narayanan

 

 

 

 

SBC - Internet access at a great low price.