REAL TRUTH OF SUGRIVA AND VIBHISHANA

Page

saccy_mybaba

@saccy_mybaba

Newbie

Posted: 15 years ago

TRUTH IS TRUTH AND ,YOU PEOPLE LOCKED MY POST BECAUSE I WROTE TRUTH YOU PEOPLE

THINK THAT EACH CHARACTER IS SIMIRAL TO SHOWN IN SERIAL AND ALL THOSE LINKS I AM GIVING BELOW ARE FROM VALMIKI RAMAYANA AND SHRI RAM CHARITMANAS(THE VERY FIRST ONE)

SO THEY ARE VERY VERY ACCURATE

AND MIND THAT VALMIKI RAMAYANA IS THE MOST ACCURATE AND FIRST VERSION OF RAMAYANA WHICH VALMIKI JI WROTE WHILE MEDITATING AND SEEING EACH AND EVERY EVENTWITH DIVINE VISION LIKE SANJAY OF MAHABHARATA.

AND KAMABN RAMYANA IS VERY VERY IN ACCURATE AS KAMBAN CHANGED FACTS OF SUFRIVA MARRIAGE WITH TARA ALONG WITH SUGRIVA SEX RELATIONS WITH HER AND MARRIAGE OF MANDDARI AND VIBHISHANA

I SAID BEFORE THAT SUGRIVA MARRIED HIS SISTER IN LAW AFTER THE DEATH OF VALI,VALI NEVER ADVICED HIMTO MARRY TARA AND HAD SEXUAL RELATIONS WITH TARA FOR CONTINOUS 4 MOTHS OF RAINY SEASON.HE WASA DEGRADED LOW PERSON.

AND MANDODARI DID MARRIED VIBHISHANA AFTER THE DEATH OF RAVANA THIS IS THE TRUTH AND I HAVE MY POINTS AND LINKS BY FAMOUS HISTORIANS AND SOCIOLOGISTS TO PROVE THIS.

AND KAMBAN RAMAYAN IS NOT THE ACCURATE VERSION OF RAMAYAN KAMABN CHANGED MANY MANY FACTS OF RAMAYANA TO SHOW THESE LOW PEOPLE AS GOOD PEOPLE, VALMIKI RAMAYANA AND RAMCHARITMANAS ARE CURRECT VERSION OF RAMAYANA

LOOK CLOSELY

LINK OF TULSIDAS RAMCHARITMANAS THAT VIBHISHANA MARRIED MANDODARI AFTER DEATH OF RAVANA

then link of mandoari cursing ravana after his death nad wants his soul to go to hell (what kind of ideal wife would curse her husband)

taken from sreemad bhgavatam

http://209.85.175.104/search?q=cache:GQbUfQCG15YJ:vedabase.net/sb/9/10/en1+bhagavatam+on+mandodari+O+pleasure+of+the+Rakshasa+dynasty&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1

PROOF OF MANDODARI MARRIED VIBHISHANA

http://209.85.175.104/search?q=cache:40N129ErgAoJ:www.manushi-india.org/pdfs_issues/PDF%2520145/Panchkayana%252030-37.pdf+living+by+their+own+norms+mandodari&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1

PROOF OS SUGRIVA HAS SEXUAL RELATIONS WITH HIS SISTER IN LAW TARA

http://72.14.205.104/search?q=cache:dVjoZUj6X8oJ:www.geocities.com/raomap/kishkindha.html+kishkindha+capital&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1

sugriva himself telling lord rama that after he presumed vali is dead he closed the gate of cave and gained tara along with kishkindha kingdom and later he calls his brother vali evil minded,taken from valmikiramayana

http://www.valmikiramayan.net/kishkindha/sarga46/kishkindha_46_frame.htm

proof of sexual relations between sugriva and tara post death of vali taken from valmiki ramayana

http://209.85.175.104/search?q=cache:PXLnlv-z4TwJ:www.valmikiramayan.net/kishkindha/sarga33/kishkindha_33_prose.htm+valmiki+ramayana+Exquisitely+featured+Tara+went+to+the+proximity+of+Lakshmana&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2

http://209.85.175.104/search?q=cache:Sjw2Q_FO6bcJ:www.valmikiramayan.net/kishkindha/sarga31/kishkindha_31_prose.htm+valmiki+ramayana+At+that+time,+he+who+is+in+a+lustful+mood,+who+is+in+the+company+of+Lady+Tara&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2

proof that mandodari maaried vibhishana after ravana's death

http://209.85.175.104/search?q=cache:DOYBtxMq5CcJ:hinduism.suite101.com/article.cfm/panch_kanya_or_five_virgins+panchkanya+mandodari+tara&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1

http://209.85.175.104/search?q=cache:tJvm1gefNygJ:www.boloji.com/bookreviews/069.htm+mandodari+married+vibhishana&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=74

http://209.85.175.104/search?q=cache:KEGkbDvpWeQJ:spirituality.indiatimes.com/articleshow/msid-1107397,prtpage-1.cms+mandodari+married+vibhishana&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=11

http://209.85.175.104/search?q=cache:nnxB8lEKoMkJ:www.suite101.com/blog/hkyyin/diwali_or_dipavali+mandodari+married+vibhishana&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=21

http://209.85.175.104/search?q=cache:m-LiSGJH7soJ:www.hindunet.com/forum/showflat.php%3FCat%3D%26Number%3D86792%26Main%3D86458+mandodari+marry+vibhishana&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=39

another proof of mandodari marriage with vibhishana ,by historian amreeta sen

http://209.85.175.104/search?q=cache:nUOeltXnOIAJ:www.boloji.com/hinduism/panchkanya/pk03.htm+panchkanya+Further,+like+Tara,+she+accepts+her+husband%E2%80%99s+enemy+and+brother+as+spouse,&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1

proof from valmiki ramayana that vali never said sugriva to marry tara

http://www.valmikiramayan.net/kishkindha/sarga22/kishkindha_22_frame.htm

PROOF OF SUGRIVA TAKEN WIDOWED TARA AFTER DEATH OF VALI AS HIS WIFE TAKEN FROM THE MAHABHARATA AND NARRATED BY SAGE MARKANDAYA

http://209.85.175.104/search?q=cache:lHgT86uBDdYJ:www.harekrsna.com/sun/editorials/mahabharata/vana/mahabharata278.htm+tara+married+sugriva+after+vali&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=6

people like sugriva and vibhishana were very very low and cheap who married and had sex with their bhabhi they were not good and noble people and all above links prove that

NOTE-ANGAD CRITICIZES SUGRIVA FOR MARRYING TARA WHO IS LIKE MOTHER TO SUGRIVA,LINK TAKEN FROM VALMIKI RAMAYANA

http://209.85.175.104/search?q=cache:mhiSYa7RzdEJ:www.valmikiramayan.net/kishkindha/sarga55/kishkindha_55_prose.htm+valmiki+ramayana+Which+Sugreeva+has+arrogated+his+elder+brother%27s+wife&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2

you people think that all those characters were like they are shown in televison serial but TRUTH IS VERY HARSH AND BRUTAL MY FRIEND ,PEOPLE LIKE SUGRIVA AND VIBHIHSNA WERE NOT PIOUS

THEY WERE LOW PEOPLE AND I HAVE ALL THOSE SPECIFIED LINKS TO PROVE THAT.

ANDPLEASE READ MY FIRST LINK IT IS FROM RAM CHARITMANAS

BUT THERE IS ONE MORE TRUTH THAT LORD RAMA SAID TO TARA IN VALMIKI RAMAYANA THAT YOU WILL GET SUPREME IMPORATNCE AS BEFORE BECAUSE YOU WILL BE GETTING MARRIED TO SUGRIVA .

BUT AS AN IDEAL CONDITION SUGRIVA AND VIBHISHANA SHOULD HAVE TREATED TARA AND MANDODARI LIKE MOTHER AFTER DEATH OF THEIR ELDER BROTHERS BUT INSTEAD THEY MARRIED THEIR SISTER IN LAWS AND HAD PHYSICAL RELATIONS WITH THEM ESPECIALLY SUGRIVA HAD EXPLICIT SEX WITH TARA DURING MONSOON.

THIS IS THE TRUTH WHICH MUST BE TOLD.

ONE MORE THING SITAJI IS NOT IN PANCHKANYA ALONG WITH MANDODARI AND TARA,SITAJI IS A GODDESS SHE IS AMONG PANCH MAHA SATI.

ALL PANCHKANYAS AHALYA,TARA,MANDODARI,DRAUPADI AND KUNTI HAD SEXUAL RELATIONS WITH MORE THAN ONE MAN.

TARA AND MANDODARI WERE REAL LOW WOMEN.

AND REALITY MUST BE COME BEFORE PUBLIC.

Edited by akhl - 15 years ago

Quote

Frequent Posters

343707

Inactive

Posted: 15 years ago

My advise to you dear go and have a good cheakup of ur mind from your trusted doctor or if you ask i can give u names of some good Psychiatrist oh dear GET WELL SOOOOOON 😛😆😃

Quote

382868

Inactive

Posted: 15 years ago

hmmmm,

i will read the links..

and i have one very nice links, abt panch - kanya.

and all of them are very respected. there are few reasons for that.

the way u r looking at the thing is wrong.. u have to see the other side too.

i will find the link, and will write it here later.

Quote

sita

@sitakshii

IF-Stunnerz

+ 4

Posted: 15 years ago

folks !!!! many versions of VALMIKI RAMAYAN & TULSIDAS RAMAYAN on net are not the authentic ones, i hv confirmed it from my parents & grandparents tht TULSIDASJI nothing wrote abt such cheap stuff & nor valmiki ji !!!! today only on aastha channel MURARI BAPU (india's spiritual guru) was telling tht both TULSIDASJI & VALMIKIJI wrote the story of RAMAYAN in maryada !!!!
donot beleive in the crap stuff written my this member saccy my baba !!!

i will ask moderators to hv a look at this crap post !!!!

plz!!!! donot reply anymore as i am asking mods to close this unauthentic & disgusting thread !!!!

plz!!!! all the RAMJI & SITAJI devotees donot reply anymore & mods wud take care of this member !!!!

Quote

sita

@sitakshii

IF-Stunnerz

+ 4

Posted: 15 years ago

Originally posted by: Huduga
hmmmm,

i will read the links..

and i have one very nice links, abt panch - kanya.

and all of them are very respected. there are few reasons for that.

the way u r looking at the thing is wrong.. u have to see the other side too.

i will find the link, and will write it here later.

since u don't know this ,so lemme tell u tht there are many google websites on PRITHVIRAJ CHAUHAN ,WHERE such crap info is written abt such a great warrior PRITHVI RAJ CHAUHAN !!!!

DO U KNOW THT posting the links of such un-authentic websites is not at all allowed on PRITHVI RAJ CHAUHAN FORUM !!!! such sites are banned !!!!

donot beleive on the sites ,purchase the RAM CHARITMANAS & VALMIKI RAMAYAN & READ URSELF !!!! then u will beleive tht what ever crap stuff written by this memeber saccymy baba is all false !!!!

I SWEAR ON THE NAME OF RAM & SITAJI tht nothing of this sort (which saccy my baba) has mentioned is written in RAM CHARITMANAS & VALMIKI RAMAYAN !!!!

plz!!! do not reply to this thread as moderators gonna take care of this thread !!!!!

unnecessary don't boil ur blood ,lets mods do their job !!!

Quote

akhl

@akhl

IF-Rockerz

Posted: 15 years ago

Rajnish and Sita,
The topic starter has the right to share his/her opinion so long it follows IF's code of conduct. Therefore, I will observe the progress of the thread to see how it is proceeding.

Saccy_mybaba,
Please do not use so many of capitalizations. It is not good. Use it only sparingly and that too when some particular word or phrase is really to be highlighted.

To all those who want to participate in this discussion: -
Please read the posts in this thread. Go through the links and then share your opinions without going off-track.

I will go thru the links to see if posting those links violates IF's code. If yes, I will delete this thread. Otherwise, I will let it continue.
Edited by akhl - 15 years ago

Quote

sita

@sitakshii

IF-Stunnerz

+ 4

Posted: 15 years ago

BUT AKHL this member saccy my baba has broken the IF RULE by the usage of vulgar & cheap language ,he shud know tht he is using the words for the character of an HOLY EPIC RAMAYAN !!!
i hv asked yummys to hv a look at this cheap thread !!!!

AKHL it will b great if u shut this cheap thread !!!

the language is really filthy & the use of caps is also there so 2 rules of IF hv been broken !!!!

when we all know tht TULSIDASJI HAS NOT written such stuff then why this memebr unnecessarily trying to create a chaos on the forum ????? we all hv RAMCHARITMANAS at our homes ,we all know tht nothing of tht sort is being written ,we all gave our proofs to this memebr earlier also in the thread which he made on the same topic ,which was closed by yummys !!!

again this memebr is back !!!! what is this ?????

anyways i hv send my message to yummys !!!

Quote

382868

Inactive

Posted: 15 years ago

Let him tell whatever he wants to say. as long as he is in the limits,

i wud have liked if he wud have structured his post in a better way.
If he is here to learn, and willing to listen to us too, then it is great.

Bcoz many other ppl raises such type of questions, and we shud try to show them our side of arguments too.

Saccy,
i have tulsidaas's ramcharitmanas.
Vaalmiki's ramayan i don't have.

maybe this topic will get locked.
bcoz ur way of writing is kind of attacking n criticising type.
there are so many books, so many sites,
difficult to find which is wrong, which is right.

but my intention is to learn nice things out of it.
if we want to criticise , we can find thousands.
but we dont grow by that.

if u want to open new topic in future, / or with another ID.

please use nice language, nice formatting.
and be like a friend :-)

if u r here to learn and explore.
as all of us are here.
then u r most welcome.
😊

Quote

382868

Inactive

Posted: 15 years ago

sita11.

yeah u r right.
i won't discuss this matter with him.

if he talks this way.
------
Saccy,
please edit ur post. and talk in a nice manner.
be a friend :-)

Quote

akhl

@akhl

IF-Rockerz

Posted: 15 years ago

Saccy_mybaba,
Here is my analysis of your post. You have written as if you are ordering us by shouting at us. That is a bad thing to do.

[quote]TRUTH IS TRUTH AND ,YOU PEOPLE LOCKED MY POST BECAUSE I WROTE TRUTH [/quote]
What you think as truth may or may not be truth. Irrespective of that, no thread is locked for containing truth.

[quote]YOU PEOPLE THINK THAT EACH CHARACTER IS SIMIRAL TO SHOWN IN SERIAL[/quote]
Wrong again. There have been posts written by members here that some of things shown in the serial are different from what they have read in scriptures.

[quote] AND ALL THOSE LINKS I AM GIVING BELOW ARE FROM VALMIKI RAMAYANA AND SHRI RAM CHARITMANAS(THE VERY FIRST ONE)
SO THEY ARE VERY VERY ACCURATE[/quote]
You are saying that your belief is as per Valmiki Ramayan and Ramacharitmanas. There are members who have opposing view and they also claim that their views are as per Valmiki Ramayan. Therefore, I will not side with either one as of now. I will study your points in detail and then get back.

[quote]AND MIND THAT VALMIKI RAMAYANA IS THE MOST ACCURATE AND FIRST VERSION OF RAMAYANA WHICH VALMIKI JI WROTE WHILE MEDITATING AND SEEING EACH AND EVERY EVENTWITH DIVINE VISION LIKE SANJAY OF MAHABHARATA.[/quote]
Most of members here agree with this. Therefore, there was no need to use all caps and large font.

[quote]AND KAMABN RAMYANA IS VERY VERY IN ACCURATE[/quote]
Again, many members here agree that Kamban Ramayan is less accurate than Valmiki Ramayan. Therefore, there was no need of all caps and large font.

[quote]AS KAMBAN CHANGED FACTS OF SUFRIVA MARRIAGE WITH TARA ALONG WITH SUGRIVA SEX RELATIONS WITH HER AND MARRIAGE OF MANDDARI AND VIBHISHANA. I SAID BEFORE THAT SUGRIVA MARRIED HIS SISTER IN LAW AFTER THE DEATH OF VALI,VALI NEVER ADVICED HIMTO MARRY TARA AND HAD SEXUAL RELATIONS WITH TARA FOR CONTINOUS 4 MOTHS OF RAINY SEASON.[/quote]
Please do not use so explicit language unless really needed.

[quote]HE WASA DEGRADED LOW PERSON.[/quote]
There are different gradations of being low or high. Things are rarely completely black or while. They are mostly different shades of gray.

[quote]AND MANDODARI DID MARRIED VIBHISHANA AFTER THE DEATH OF RAVANA THIS IS THE TRUTH AND I HAVE MY POINTS AND LINKS BY FAMOUS HISTORIANS AND SOCIOLOGISTS TO PROVE THIS.[/quote]
It is good provided you really have proof.

[quote]AND KAMBAN RAMAYAN IS NOT THE ACCURATE VERSION OF RAMAYAN KAMABN CHANGED MANY MANY FACTS OF RAMAYANA TO SHOW THESE LOW PEOPLE AS GOOD PEOPLE, VALMIKI RAMAYANA AND RAMCHARITMANAS ARE CURRECT VERSION OF RAMAYANA[/quote]
It is not good to repeat the same thing and that too in the same post.

Quote