Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The Necromancer
Rama sent Sita away according to the dharma of a king. He is right.
The most obvious way for me that Krishna 'bent the rules' was in the battle between Duryodhana and Bhima.
Because Draupadi said "your penis shall be your downfall" - or something like it to Duryodhana, Krishna ordered Bhima to strike him there.
Now, striking a guy 'down there' goes against every rule of Hindu warfare and everybody...I mean everybody was pretty disgusted with it at the time.
This gave a misguided king (Duryodhana) almost cult celebrity status and he was wheeled around the battlefield on the back of a chariot to talk to the soldiers until he died a few days later.
Some of those talks were very enlightening, as well as his final discourse with Lord Yama.
If I had anything 'against Krishna' it would be putting a self-fulfilling prophecy into play by breaking the rules of war to do it.
Aum Namah Shivaya
|
Like yourself, most supporters of Ram's act of sending away Sita do indeed claim that it was the right dharma for a king. Nonetheless, it still troubles me.
I too recall that incident in the life of Krishna, where Krishna advised Bhima to strike at the groin, the only area that Ghandhari had not rendered invulnerable with her celestial vision. (Once again, Krishna was involved.) I don't recall the word "penis" being explicitly used.
I also recall when Krishna had Yudisthira, a man of truth, essentially "lie" about Ashwathama (the elephant, not the man) being dead. He thus acted in the best interests of all but he did "bend the rules" a bit there too.
In any case, thanks for your input on Ram. It's still the only incident I can recall with Ram that still troubles me. It seems as if he could have handled it differently (though I don't have any brilliant suggestions in this moment).