Vali – Part 4 - திருத்த வரலாறு

09:42, 5 நவம்பர் 2012 இல் Dev

2012-11-05T09:42:47Z

09:41, 5 நவம்பர் 2012 இல் Dev

2012-11-05T09:41:06Z

09:40, 5 நவம்பர் 2012 இல் Dev

2012-11-05T09:40:01Z

09:21, 5 நவம்பர் 2012 இல் Dev

2012-11-05T09:21:32Z

09:18, 5 நவம்பர் 2012 இல் Dev

2012-11-05T09:18:02Z

11:50, 25 ஜூன் 2010 இல் Hariki

2010-06-25T11:50:09Z

11:43, 25 ஜூன் 2010 இல் Hariki

2010-06-25T11:43:03Z

11:21, 25 ஜூன் 2010 இல் Hariki

2010-06-25T11:21:58Z

00:21, 7 பெப்ரவரி 2010 இல் Hariki

2010-02-07T00:21:43Z

08:40, 6 பெப்ரவரி 2010 இல் Hariki

2010-02-06T08:40:08Z

மாற்றங்களைக் காட்டு

@@ வரிசை 27: / வரிசை 27: @@
 <br>
-Vali (in Kamba Ramayana) speaks as a person who is convinced with the intentions of Sugriva and who is clear in his mind about what he would and would not do to them after his death. It is therefore that we do not find any reference to Angada or Tara when he speaks to Sugriva. After he completed saying whatever he wanted to say to Sugriva, he turns to Rama and tells him ‘ மன்னவர்க்கு அரசன் மைந்த&nbsp;! ’ O son of king of kings! (Son of Dasaratha!) ‘ மற்று இவன் சுற்றத்தோடும் ’ this Sugriva, with all his kith and kin, take refuge in you. It is for you to protect them.’ ‘என்று உய்த்தே, உயர் கரம் உச்சி வைத்தான் ’ So saying, he raised his hand and touched Sugriva’s head, blessing him.
+Vali (in Kamba Ramayana) speaks as a person who is convinced with the intentions of Sugriva and who is clear in his mind about what he would and would not do to them after his death. It is therefore that we do not find any reference to Angada or Tara when he speaks to Sugriva. After he completed saying whatever he wanted to say to Sugriva, he turns to Rama and tells him ‘ மன்னவர்க்கு அரசன் மைந்த&nbsp;! ’ O son of king of kings! (Son of Dasaratha!) ‘ மற்று இவன் சுற்றத்தோடும் உன் அடைக்கலம் ’ this Sugriva, with all his kith and kin, take refuge in you. It is for you to protect them.’ ‘என்று உய்த்தே, உயர் கரம் உச்சி வைத்தான் ’ So saying, he raised his hand and touched Sugriva’s head, blessing him.
 <br>

@@ வரிசை 25: / வரிசை 25: @@
 We see the advices that Vali gives to Sugriva and Angada centre around just two points here. ‘Do not lament over my death. I am only leaving for good. Never falter in your duty to this person, Rama. Help him in his mission. That is your duty. That is what you are supposed to do.’
 <br>
-Vali (in Kamba Ramayana) speaks as a person who is convinced with the intentions of Sugriva and who is clear in his mind about what he would and would not do to them after his death. It is therefore that we do not find any reference to Angada or Tara when he speaks to Sugriva. After he completed saying whatever he wanted to say to Sugriva, he turns to Rama and tells him ‘ மன்னவர்க்கு அரசன் மைந்த ! ’ O son of king of kings! (Son of Dasaratha!) ‘ மற்று இவன் சுற்றத்தோடும் ’ this Sugriva, with all his kith and kin, take refuge in you. It is for you to protect them.’ ‘என்று உய்த்தே, உயர் கரம் உச்சி வைத்தான் ’ So saying, he raised his hand and touched Sugriva’s head, blessing him.
+Vali (in Kamba Ramayana) speaks as a person who is convinced with the intentions of Sugriva and who is clear in his mind about what he would and would not do to them after his death. It is therefore that we do not find any reference to Angada or Tara when he speaks to Sugriva. After he completed saying whatever he wanted to say to Sugriva, he turns to Rama and tells him ‘ மன்னவர்க்கு அரசன் மைந்த&nbsp;! ’ O son of king of kings! (Son of Dasaratha!) ‘ மற்று இவன் சுற்றத்தோடும் ’ this Sugriva, with all his kith and kin, take refuge in you. It is for you to protect them.’ ‘என்று உய்த்தே, உயர் கரம் உச்சி வைத்தான் ’ So saying, he raised his hand and touched Sugriva’s head, blessing him.
 <br>
 It is to be seen here that he asks Sugriva to bring Angada to his presence. That itself is a testimony of his trust. Once again, he gives his advice to Angada, on similar lines as given to Sugriva. Turning to Rama he said, ‘This is Angada, my son. ‘நீநிற நிருதர் என்னும் துய் அடை கனலி அன்ன தோளினன்.’ He possesses shoulders of fire that would turn to embers the rakshasas like pieces of cotton. ‘தொழிலும் தூயன்’ He is pure in his deeds. ‘ உன் கையடை ஆகும்.’ Please take him under your protection.
 <br>
 This supplication does not say that this is required because Vali was not sure of what Sugriva would do. It simply stops with seeking the protection of Rama for Angada as he sought for Sugriva. With those words, Vali dies. The verses do not speak anything about Tara. Kamban changes the order of events and makes Tara to come only after Vali dies.
 <br>
 When Vali solicited the protection of Rama for Angada, Rama did something that was unexpected and remarkable. That stands in testimony to the trust that he placed in Angada, apart from conferring honours on Angada.

@@ வரிசை 25: / வரிசை 25: @@
 We see the advices that Vali gives to Sugriva and Angada centre around just two points here. ‘Do not lament over my death. I am only leaving for good. Never falter in your duty to this person, Rama. Help him in his mission. That is your duty. That is what you are supposed to do.’
-Vali (in Kamba Ramayana) speaks as a person who is convinced with the intentions of Sugriva and who is clear in his mind about what he would and would not do to them after his death. It is therefore that we do not find any reference to Angada or Tara when he speaks to Sugriva. After he completed saying whatever he wanted to say to Sugriva, he turns to Rama and tells him ‘mannavarkku arasan maindha’ O son of king of kings! (Son of Dasaratha!) ‘matru ivan sutrathOdum un adaikkalam’ this Sugriva, with all his kith and kin, take refuge in you. It is for you to protect them.’ ‘endru uithE uyar karam uchchi vaiththaan.’ So saying, he raised his hand and touched Sugriva’s head, blessing him.
+<br>
-It is to be seen here that he asks Sugriva to bring Angada to his presence. That itself is a testimony of his trust. Once again, he gives his advice to Angada, on similar lines as given to Sugriva. Turning to Rama he said, ‘This is Angada, my son. ‘neenira nirudhar ennum thui adai kanali anna thOLinan.’ He possesses shoulders of fire that would turn to embers the rakshasas like pieces of cotton. ‘thozhilum thooyan.’ He is pure in his deeds. ‘un kai adai aagum.’ Please take him under your protection.
+Vali (in Kamba Ramayana) speaks as a person who is convinced with the intentions of Sugriva and who is clear in his mind about what he would and would not do to them after his death. It is therefore that we do not find any reference to Angada or Tara when he speaks to Sugriva. After he completed saying whatever he wanted to say to Sugriva, he turns to Rama and tells him ‘ மன்னவர்க்கு அரசன் மைந்த ! ’ O son of king of kings! (Son of Dasaratha!) ‘ மற்று இவன் சுற்றத்தோடும் ’ this Sugriva, with all his kith and kin, take refuge in you. It is for you to protect them.’ ‘என்று உய்த்தே, உயர் கரம் உச்சி வைத்தான் ’ So saying, he raised his hand and touched Sugriva’s head, blessing him.
 This supplication does not say that this is required because Vali was not sure of what Sugriva would do. It simply stops with seeking the protection of Rama for Angada as he sought for Sugriva. With those words, Vali dies. The verses do not speak anything about Tara. Kamban changes the order of events and makes Tara to come only after Vali dies.
-When Vali solicited the protection of Rama for Angada, Rama did something that was unexpected and remarkable. That stands in testimony to the trust that he placed in Angada, apart from conferring honours on Angada.
+<br>
 = The sword of Rama  =

@@ வரிசை 39: / வரிசை 39: @@
 There are two varying interpretations of this line. Some feel that Rama, with the sword in hand, extended it towards Angada, pointing it to him (implying his killing of Vali) and told ‘bear this’. In other words, ‘bear with me for this.’ They feel that Rama apologises to Angada and admire his ability to come down from his exalted stature and bend before a youngster and asking for his pardon for having killed his father. He is able to see the agony in the heart of Angada and therefore he apologies to him, is what they say, to support their interpretation.
-But this interpretation is somewhat laboured. No explanation or interpretation, however good it may be, can be considered good unless it is correct and appropriate also. It should have the backing of the Poet. It should have other incidents or events to support that claim. There should be internal evidence to prove that point. Sadly, there is nothing to support this argument excepting the third line of the verse that says ‘ennalum ulagam Ezhum Ethina.’ When Rama said this, all the seven worlds praised him. What is there in the simple act of handing over a sword for all the seven worlds to praise him, the ‘advocates of apology’ ask. According to them, the seven worlds praised Rama because he apologised to Angada.
+But this interpretation is somewhat laboured. No explanation or interpretation, however good it may be, can be considered good unless it is correct and appropriate also. It should have the backing of the Poet. It should have other incidents or events to support that claim. There should be internal evidence to prove that point. Sadly, there is nothing to support this argument excepting the third line of the verse that says ‘என்னலும் உலகம் ஏழும் ஏத்தின.’ When Rama said this, all the seven worlds praised him. What is there in the simple act of handing over a sword for all the seven worlds to praise him, the ‘advocates of apology’ ask. According to them, the seven worlds praised Rama because he apologised to Angada.
 We don’t deny the fact that the explanation as it is, is good. However, one question arises. What is the need for Rama to draw out his sword and point to Vali with it, while he can simply point to him with his finger? One has to remember Rama is an archer and always carries the bow in his hand and therefore his sword would necessarily be hanging from his side, about his waist, and will not be always in his hand, as does the bow. Therefore, if he were to point to Vali with his sword, he should first draw it out of the sheath. Why should he go through all this trouble for a simple act of pointing to Vali! That makes the ‘interpretation as apology’ rather weak.

@@ வரிசை 35: / வரிசை 35: @@
 = The sword of Rama  =
-Kamban gives a new dimension to trust and trustworthiness with the gesture of Rama. ‘than adi thaazhalOdum, thamaraith thadang kaNNaanum’ when Angada fell at his feet, the lotus eyed Rama ‘ponnudai vaaLai neeti nee idhu poruthi endraan’ extended his sword and told Angada, ‘bear this.’
+Kamban gives a new dimension to trust and trustworthiness with the gesture of Rama. ‘தன்னடி ஆழ்தலோடும், தாமரைத் தடங்கணானும்’ when Angada fell at his feet, the lotus eyed Rama ‘ பொன்னுடை வாளை நீட்டி நீயிது பொறுத்தி என்றான்’ extended his sword and told Angada, ‘bear this.’
 There are two varying interpretations of this line. Some feel that Rama, with the sword in hand, extended it towards Angada, pointing it to him (implying his killing of Vali) and told ‘bear this’. In other words, ‘bear with me for this.’ They feel that Rama apologises to Angada and admire his ability to come down from his exalted stature and bend before a youngster and asking for his pardon for having killed his father. He is able to see the agony in the heart of Angada and therefore he apologies to him, is what they say, to support their interpretation.
@@ வரிசை 45: / வரிசை 45: @@
 And when apology is sought for, it means that Rama was sorry for what he did. But Rama says that he killed Vali, without even the trace of feeling guilty about it. “No agony is felt by me or remorse for what I have done,” is what Rama says to Vali when he was giving out his reasons for killing him from behind a tree. (Valmiki Ramayana, Kishkindha Kanda, Canto 18, Sloka 37). And therefore, there is no reason why he should apologise. There is no reason to believe that he apologised out of pity for Angada, to pacify his heart. Vali has already told Angada that Rama was not at fault and that he should take to him as his benefactor. Angada has accepted that and has now fallen at the feet of Rama. Pity is therefore no reason for seeking apology when none involved feels that Rama is at fault. In the circumstances, the ‘apology’ idea sounds rather incongruous, though it indeed is very good.
 Then what was the intention of Rama in handing over his sword to Angada? Is there any internal evidence to prove that stand? Why should at all he hand his sword to Angada? Was handing over the sword a simple act? Was there nothing in it for ‘all the seven worlds to praise?’
 = Assurance, not an apology  =

@@ வரிசை 259: / வரிசை 259: @@
 This third instance very clearly, and without the least scope for any doubt, goes to point that (1) Rama was very particular in adopting the right ways to achieve the right ends. The adage ‘Ends justify means’ had nothing to do with him. (2) He was unsparing and uncompromising in following his own judgement and did not budge even when the great sage Viswamitra – who was at that time the very embodiment of his parents – wanted him to kill Tataka. He did so only after sufficient reasons, justifications and precedents were given to him. (3) He did not resort to the use of the supreme powers of destruction over which he had ready access, even when a crisis was in the making.
 In both the above occasions, one can see Sri Rama thinking it over and over again before coming to the final decision. This therefore gives credence to the argument of the great commentator Govindaraja, who says that Rama hesitated for a while before killing Vali and that is why he did not kill him in the first encounter with Sugriva. But it has also to be remembered that once Sri Rama decides to do a particular thing, he was clear in his mind about the course of action and did it without any guilt feelings about what he did. That is why he is able to say, “No agony is felt by me or remorse for what I have done,” to Vali. &nbsp;And. lastly, when Vali himself accepts that Rama was right in killing him, that he deserves to be punished for what he had done, in both the versions of Valmiki and Kamban, who else needs to argue the case of Rama! &nbsp;It needs no further justification when he who began with an accusation, relaised and sublimated into submission and went to the extent of justifying the act of Rama. &nbsp;Here, listen to him from Kamban:&nbsp;
-'உண்டு எனும் தருமமே உருவமா உடைய நிற்<br>கண்டு கொண்டேன்; இனிக் காண என் கடவெனோ?<br>பண்டொடு இன்று அளவுமே என் பெரும் பழவினைத்<br>தண்டமே; அடியனேற்கு உறு பதம் தருவதே.
+<br>
-I have (at last) seen, realised, the very Dharma Everlasting, (remaining) embodied in your Self. &nbsp;What is there more for me to see! &nbsp;This punishment (of yours) wipes me clean of all the sins of my misdeeds of yore; and confers unto me the Realisation, the Liberation (or mukthi, the Ultimate for every soul). &nbsp;Such admissions of misdeeds can be found in the last submissions of Vali, in Valmiki's version of Ramayana. &nbsp;I would call particular reference to this Sloka:
+<br>
-<blockquote>
+"'''The fault occurring from my fault of maltreating Sugreeva''' may not light upon that self-reproachful Tara, and it will be apt of you to see that Sugreeva will not look down on her treating her as the wife his rival"
-sugriive ca a.ngade caiva vidhatsva matim uttamaam |<br>tvam hi goptaa ca shaastaa ca kaaryaakaarya vidhau sthitaH || [http://www.valmikiramayan.net/kishkindha/sarga18/kishkindha_18_frame.htm 4-18-53]
-</blockquote>
-"'''You have firm convictions about practicable and impracticable procedures, and you alone are the protector of the good and punisher of the bad''', hence treat both Sugreeva and Angada with equal compassion."&nbsp;
-mat doSa kR^ita doSaam taam yathaa taaraam tapasviniim |<br>sugriivo na avamanyeta tathaa avasthaatum arhasi || 4-18-55
+<br>
-−
-"'''The fault occurring from my fault of maltreating Sugreeva''' may not light upon that self-reproachful Tara, and it will be apt of you to see that Sugreeva will not look down on her treating her as the wife his rival"
-−
-−
-−
-When Vali himself admits his faults and accepts Rama's act as justified, what further argument is needed!
-−
-−
 So far for Vali and his killing. We shall now move over to Sugriva, Tara and Angada.

@@ வரிசை 257: / வரிசை 257: @@
 Be it the suggestion of Matali, or his own decision as shown by Kamban, both the Poets make one thing very clear. It took a long time for Rama to come to this decision. He was avoiding this move for as long as it was possible for him to do so. ‘Do not play the defence. Be on the offensive’ is the advice given by Matali.
-This third instance very clearly, and without the least scope for any doubt that (1) Rama was very particular in adopting the right ways to achieve the right ends. The adage ‘Ends justify means’ had nothing to do with him. (2) He was unsparing and uncompromising in following his own judgement and did not budge even when the great sage Viswamitra – who was at that time the very embodiment of his parents – wanted him to kill Tataka. He did so only after sufficient reasons, justifications and precedents were given to him. (3) He did not resort to the use of the supreme powers of destruction over which he had ready access, even when a crisis was in the making.
+This third instance very clearly, and without the least scope for any doubt, goes to point that (1) Rama was very particular in adopting the right ways to achieve the right ends. The adage ‘Ends justify means’ had nothing to do with him. (2) He was unsparing and uncompromising in following his own judgement and did not budge even when the great sage Viswamitra – who was at that time the very embodiment of his parents – wanted him to kill Tataka. He did so only after sufficient reasons, justifications and precedents were given to him. (3) He did not resort to the use of the supreme powers of destruction over which he had ready access, even when a crisis was in the making.
 In both the above occasions, one can see Sri Rama thinking it over and over again before coming to the final decision. This therefore gives credence to the argument of the great commentator Govindaraja, who says that Rama hesitated for a while before killing Vali and that is why he did not kill him in the first encounter with Sugriva. But it has also to be remembered that once Sri Rama decides to do a particular thing, he was clear in his mind about the course of action and did it without any guilt feelings about what he did. That is why he is able to say, “No agony is felt by me or remorse for what I have done,” to Vali.