@Dhaniya_Mirchi@PinkiPragya .Even if someone later uses divine blessings destructively, that doesn't automatically mean the deity endorsed those future actions.
We should distinguish the act of granting a boon from the recipient's independent choices and the karma arising from those choices.
3/3
@Dhaniya_Mirchi@PinkiPragya The point is that knowledge, advice and opportunity do not eliminate an individual's free will or responsibility for subsequent actions.
Performing tapasya to obtain a boon and deciding how to use that boon are two different things.
2/3
#WATCH | Delhi | Prime Minister Narendra Modi says, "In our country, the electrification of the railways has been underway since the 1930s—meaning it began 100 years ago. Yet, by 2014—even after 90 years—only 30% of the work had been completed. Had we continued at that same pace, it would have taken several more decades to finish. Today, however, almost the entire Indian railway network has been electrified..."
He also says, "There was a time when every leader, speaking from the Red Fort, would talk about eradicating poverty—as if it were a mandatory mantra. Every election cycle brought promises to eliminate poverty. But today, the poor are lifting themselves out of poverty..."
(Source: DD)
@saikatm87@grok@MostlyKohli Valmiki narrated Rama's story, he didn't create Rama. And Bala Kanda 1.15 explicitly describes Vishnu taking birth as Dasharatha's son. If you don't know the meaning of “full-fledged,” perhaps learn it before using it. 😂
@saikatm87@grok@MostlyKohli You can't identify the supposed 25K core, yet confidently declare Rama's story excluded from it. Convenient, isn't it? A hypothesis isn't proof. Stop presenting speculation as established scholarship. 😂
@saikatm87@grok@MostlyKohli Calling it a “side story” doesn't establish when it entered the Mahabharata. The 24,000 verse Bharata excludes subsidiary stories, but that doesn't prove this episode or verse 3.147.29 was absent. Can you show manuscript evidence that it was added later? That's my question.
@saikatm87@grok@MostlyKohli "Full-fledged God"? Was Rama partially Vishnu before Gupta times? 😂 Mahabharata 3.147 explicitly identifies Dasharatha's Rama as Vishnu in human form. The question is when that verse entered the text, not what it says. Let's not confuse textual dating with theological meaning.
@saikatm87@grok@MostlyKohli A theory about the epic's overall development is not proof about the history of an individual verse. Let's examine the actual evidence rather than keep changing the subject. 🙂 3/3
@saikatm87@grok@MostlyKohli I agree that the Mahabharata evolved. But can you provide manuscript-critical evidence that Mahabharata 3.147's explicit identification of Dasharatha's Rama as Vishnu was a later interpolation?
2/3
@saikatm87@grok@MostlyKohli Also, the claim that the epics were first written down 800-1000 years later is not established. A Cambodian Sanskrit inscription from c. 600 CE already records a Ramayana codex. 3/3
@saikatm87@grok@MostlyKohli Can you show manuscript-critical evidence that THIS specific verse is a later interpolation, rather than simply calling the entire Vana Parva a later addition?
2/3
@saikatm87@grok@MostlyKohli Lol, Shri Rama’s identity as Vishnu Ji is not confined to Valmiki’s Bala Kanda. Mahabharata, Vana Parva 3.147, calls Dasharatha’s son Rama “Vishnu in human form” (विष्णुर्मानुषरूपेण). Harivamsha 1.41.121–123 also explicitly describes Rama’s birth as a Vishnu incarnation.
@grok
#WATCH | Delhi: On Chinese vloggers reportedly livestreaming from slums in Dhaka, MEA Spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal says, "We have seen media reports in this regard. Such efforts to present a distorted picture of any country are unfortunate. Insofar as efforts to buy foreign elements to portray Dhaka as Delhi are concerned, the peddling of false narratives only undermines the credibility of those who are undertaking such actions and those who are behind them. And I would urge the authorities concerned to take action against such people."