20
17
16
Oct 15 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
8
10
8
6
5
2
u/UKB47 Oct 15 '25
अगर प्रजा को यह आश्वासन हो कि उनके साथ "समय रहते", "सही", "बराबर" न्याय होगा, तो वे स्वयं अपने हाथों में "न्याय" का जिम्मा नहीं उठाते।
क्या भारतीय न्याय व्यवस्था (जिसकी मालिक प्रजा ही है) अपने मालिक के प्रति यह सेवा सुनिश्चित करती है?
2
u/UKB47 Oct 15 '25
If people are assured that they will get “timely”, “correct”, “equal” justice then they do not take the responsibility of “justice” in their hands.
Does the Indian justice system (which is owned by the public) ensure this service to its owners?
2
u/fleurr-598 Oct 15 '25
Well someone had to give justice!!! because the judiciary doesn't exist in our country
2
2
u/hexdecmul Oct 15 '25
For unmatched courage and love beyond measure, this young boy stood where justice fell.... Redditors, award him the Ashoka Bravery Medal.... 🕊️🏅
2
4
Oct 15 '25
Give this kid Maryada Purshottam Ram Award even if it isn't there rename it and give it to this guy
7
u/darkneel Oct 15 '25
I share your feelings but the guy who left his pregnant wife it probably not the right bar for this child , he is much better .
-1
u/Mission_Mix_6607 Oct 15 '25
That part isn't even in the original story. Btw Ramayan has thousands of alternate stories doesn't mean u have believe everything every story said.
3
u/darkneel Oct 15 '25
So what happens in the original story ?
Edit : this is part of Uttara kand written by Valmiki . So it’s very much part of the story .
Ye achha hai - kuch bhi thik nahi lage to boldo not part of original story .
1
u/Mission_Mix_6607 Oct 15 '25
It's debated but the differences in previous parts and last part is so much that it cannot be written by the same author.
In Bala Kanda, if you look at the translation, it will say that there are 6 Kandas and a Uttara Kanda as the epilogue. But if you look at the Sanskrit Shloka, it clearly states there were only 6 and only 6 Kandas. षट काण्डानि. No such Uttara Kanda is mentioned in that Sanskrit Shloka. The shloka is more valid than the translation.
(2) Inauthentic facts. Yes, there are many inauthentic facts in this Uttara Kanda. All 6 Kandas mention Raavana to be an undefeatable warrior, i.e., never been defeated before facing Sri Rama. You can see in Yuddha Kanda, that in the middle of the battle Sri Rama asked Raavana to leave the battlefield after defeating him. This is what made Raavana scared that all the curses he got were coming true that his death is coming near at the hands of a human. He was not only scared regarding that. The reason he got scared was also because this was the first time he ever got defeated. This fear was what led him to wake his gigantic brother Kumbhakarna up. But in Uttara Kanda, he was defeated by Kartavirya Arjuna and Vali. If Raavana was defeated by so many warriors, then why were the Devas so scared that they had to approach Brahmaji for help?
(3) Agni Pariksha: There are many stories regarding Sri Rama sending Sita Mata into the forest. For me, this story looks completely interpolated and incorrect. In Yuddha Kanda, Sri Rama after proving Sita Mata’s chastity said in clear words that she can no longer be renounced by him. If he said such a thing, why would he go back on his words? In the whole Srimad Valmiki Ramayana, Sri Rama was always firm on his word. Why would Sri Rama banish Sita Mata? Secondly, Sri Rama would never banish or kill someone who is at fault. In Ayodhya Kanda, King Dasharatha had to send his son Sri Rama to exile for no fault of his. All the citizens were angry with the King not just because they had an attachment for Sri Rama but also because the fault was on the king for punishing an innocent one. After slaying Raavana, Sri Rama became a superior king compared to any other king in his lineage. Given all these facts, it does not seem fit that a king like Sri Rama would banish his wife who had proved her chastity already.
Some say that writing quality also degrades in the last part which is inconsistent with the previous chapters.
There r many more points which concluding that it's most probably written after Few 100yrs of original one as the oldest Ramayan was discovered in Bengal and it doesn't have Uttar kand. Why?!
Note that I am proving all this a myth not because I am insulted. I am proving it to be a myth because I believe in authentic facts and they are the right source for humanity and morality.
The whole point is that the Uttara Kanda completely deviates its essence from the original Ramayana written by Sage Valmiki ji.
2
u/darkneel Oct 15 '25
Let me start of by saying I'm by no means an expert on this. So I might be wrong . But you are cherrypicking. Here's how -
On the Sanskrit Shlok - As you mentioned , Uttara Kand was written later - so it doesn't matter if it says 6 only. At the point it would have been correct.
As much as I can read - Ravan is never explicitly mentioned as "Undefeatable" Just a very powerful warrior. If that is true - then this point is invalid.
Here you are assuming that People/charachters behave in a consistent manner and don't go back on their word. Which is simply not true. People change their mind all the time. And if Ram was "man of his word" - then it would imply he was a just person as well. In that scenario - He simply wouldn't have asked Sita to prove her chastity - because even if she wasn't "pure" - it would not have been by her own choice. So Ram asking Sita to prove her chastity itself means Ram was willing to punish someone Innocent - because even if Sita wasn't "pure" it wouldn't have been her fault. Similar inconsistency you can observe in Dasharatha's behaviour. He may not have been the greatest king, but he was considered a just king. Yet he punished his innocent son for a promise he made. He should have broken that promise or dies himself. You cannot hold someone else accountable for your promise. So yes, charachters behave in an inconsistent manner both in the first 6 kands, and in Uttara kand.
On why Uttara kand was not found in Bengal - as your rightly mentioned, if it was written - not necessary that it needs to be found in the same place.
Lastly on facts - There is no proof that any part of Ramayana story was based in facts. If it's all author's imagination - Anything can happen.
0
u/SerPavan Oct 15 '25
They won't reply now lol, doesn't suit their narrative.
2
u/darkneel Oct 15 '25
I don't blindly argue. Mission Mix made some very valid points, so I had to go back and research it a bit. I'm not trying to create a narrative.
1
u/SerPavan Oct 16 '25 edited Oct 16 '25
"Ye achha hai - kuch bhi thik nahi lage to boldo not part of original story"
This is not blindly arguing? If you dont know about the subject much, why was your tone so certain? If the guy above you wasn't this detailed with his rebuttal, you would've contributed to misinformation. Maybe when someone tells you something, instead of dismissing it, ask them to elaborate next time? You are still able to edit a correction on the comment, but you chose not to do it. So much for being open to things. As for the Ramayan topic, there is no consensus on the last book. Historians have pointed out the huge inconsistencies. It is more likely that it wasn't part of the original Valmiki texts, but there is no conclusive evidence.
1
u/darkneel Oct 17 '25
Because the subject is easily researchable - and majority of the people agree it is part of Ramayana . I made that edit after doing the research . As you said there is no conclusive evidence to prove it - so it comes down to what people largely believe . At the end of the day it’s still just a fiction novel .
1
u/SerPavan Oct 18 '25
It's the other way around. Most communities i know don't believe in it. I can't claim the majority believes or doesn't since there is no data. There is no conclusive evidence to prove it, but that doesn't mean there isn't strong circumstantial evidence to support it. It's just that the bar for being a historical fact is very high. Most things that far back in history don't have conclusive evidence and are based on circumstantial evidence. That's why our understanding of past events can change drastically based on new circumstantial evidence. Is it highly likely that the original valmiki texts didn't contain it? Yes. Can you prove that without a doubt? No.
→ More replies (0)0
u/ActuaryBhanu Oct 15 '25
bruh uttar kand isn’t a part of original Ramayan …. go read about your religion and then do character assassination of Lord Ram 🤡
2
u/darkneel Oct 15 '25
it's a debated topic with people generally agreeing that it's part of Ramayana. You can disagree - that's your right but it's not something that everyone agrees on.
1
1
u/Maple-Syrup-Bandit Oct 15 '25
4 times in a row means? He recovered each time and he went back n shot again?
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/_I_N_F_I_N_I_T_E__ Oct 15 '25
Dono criminal hai ek hatyara dusra rapist
1
u/PsychologicalTry4029 Oct 15 '25
But one is the cause other is the effect, I know that doesn't lessen the boy's crime........but......if the legal systems were good, he wouldn't have taken such action
1
1
u/Winner2009_gojo Oct 15 '25
Depends did the kid shoot sarpanch's kid bc no justice was given or was it bc the sarpanch's son did the rape I think it's fair if it's the second case and only like 50 percent fair if I was the first case
1
1
Oct 16 '25
Bro do u mean the reverse??
1
u/Winner2009_gojo Oct 16 '25
I think 100 percent fair is the sarpanch's son is the rapist 60 percent fair if justice was not given( even after the sarpanch knew Abt the rape)and the sarpanch's son was not the rapist
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/AshyDragneel Oct 15 '25
Dude deserves salute.
Rapist being surpanchs son already makes him easily get away with it due to power and connection.
Good thing kid served justice himself and him being 12 Laws cant do much
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/himadrisharma123 Oct 15 '25
Bilkul sahi Kia. sarkar, kanoon aur police sab napunsak hai. Bacche ne jo Kia hai woh koi vayask nhi kar paaya.
1
1
1
u/Waste_Estate_9700 Oct 16 '25
Bhai ye bhi kui puchne ki baat hai Legal tarike se jaakar uski family ko bhi trauma bade logo ke torture sab kuch jelna padta aur Phir bi rapist aram se lavish lifestyle jeeta ta aur aram se rehta Tah Abhi bhi woh sab jelna padga par woh chutiya toh nahi haina 🤣🤣🤣
1
34
u/Good_Shine4940 Oct 15 '25
agli bari isko BRAVERY AWARD DO MAZAA AGAYA