my take on different things
hanuman was a devotee of ram he saw the world the way ram saw it
ravan was a devotee of shiva but could not do that
god is not an external object to be possessed but an Internal potential to be realized

I have seen many atheists criticizing ram for killing ravan for he followed culture but my question is
what kind of culture does not accept change. should we not call it adharm

Ram was a king he did not fight with others for the kingdom
He did not expect people to love him
He made the independent rather that dependent
He sent sita for raj dharma but when praja force him to remarry for an heir he refuses
He is a leader who takes responsibility and becomes a victim by abandoning his sitar
Contrastly these days I request politicians to read Ramayana
Krishna was leeks purushottam thus Krishna life gives a lot of values and thoughts
The way of life
Bu ram was Maryada purushottaman that is a lot of questions arise in our mind regarding the society

The society becomes perfect when there is no fear

I have no doubt that urmila is greatness personified but somehow what I think is the 14yrs is a blessing in disguise
The way lord give strength to his devotees

One thing remains unanswered was sitas anger on laxman justified when she sends him to ram
It was all fate and sita( Lakshmi ) decision but beyond that doesn’t it tell us that no one is perfect
We should stop seeing imperfections in others and doesn’t it make us believe in karma and god fearing

these question arised in my mind while reading your analysis

Credit to: SANJANA

We recommend

Comments are closed.

Yes No