In the epic Ramayan, some call Prince Vibeeshan as 'traitor'! what is your view?

The greatness of Ramayana is that if 100 people read the epic there can be 100 interpretations . One interpretation (not mine ) is that that the Book is an epic of Aryan Dravidian conflict.Vibhishan was the brother of Ravana but he worked for Sriram`s success . Technically he was against his own ruler brother .But Vibhishan was pro Dharma and anti adharma . Vibhishan was righteous . Being righteous does not make one a traitor.

A CIA employee who leaked secrets is a traitor in USA and he will face trial for treachery and treason.Back home Sarbajit Sigh was tried in Pakistan and was sentenced to death .But he was killed by unofficial methods.

The definition of patriot /traitor is relative not absolute.

Religious freedom(secularism) does not mean freedom from religion

all ignorant souls can call Vibheeshan as traitor. He knew Rama is vishnu and invinsible. Rama could also have defeated Ravan without the aid of Vibheeshan. Rama who destroyed the 7 huge trees with asingle arrow could have destroyed Ravan with his Lanka and all his sons by the same arrow. He could have sent back Hnuman with amessage to sita to come out with hanuman and join him before destroying Lanka.Yet Rama chose to act like a human being who required assistance of vibhishan to detroy Lanka.

The bhaktas of Narayan do not care as to what the world thinks of them .Meers said "Log Kahe Meera Hogayee banvari I Saans kahe Kul naasi reI Meera kahe prabhu Giridhar naagar ho gai ap hi dasi re."

Prahlada maintained that every atomic particle in the Universe is Narayan which included Hiranya Kashyap also." "Parashuram unquestioningly obeyed his father to cut off the heads of his mother and brothers but when Father offered aboon he asked that his mother and brothers be brought back to life"

It is an act of duty obedience and lovbelike of which is not found anywhere else.

Ram exiled sita because he was not like nehru clan which keeps defending Vadra the cheat.

Vibhishan had to do what was dharma.The sharangathi that he did lead him to sadgati.Vibhishana was a person who knew that rama was the supreme personality of godhead.In the manu smruti there is two ways to look at things.One is by kumbhakaran by seeing country before him.But vibhishana saw his own ultimate good rather than the temporal benefit of his subjects.So he was a good rajathanthri.Meera had given up her family as she was in such devotional love like Aandal that she wanted to marry krishna right from the beginning.She ended up tmarrying the rajput due to some untoward incidents not speculated or accepted by her.Prince Prahlad could not be a traitor at all as a traitor is someone who betrays his own country.In this case prahlad maharaj just intended to expound the ultimate truth which leads the staunch follower to moksha so that is not betrayal at all.The basic dharma underlying ramas life was firstly presented to the world by the action of parashuramas.People like parashurama are called udharana prurusha(a person who makes his life his message) because of this very same reason.So there is no distortion of their hallowd depiction even through the skeptic perspective.In the case of jesus there was nothing wrong because accepting a perfect person and making him/her the epitome of seekers of god is nothing.So this very thing speaks volumes of the greatness of jesus.In the case of prophet muhamad we have no right to criticize saints under any grounds as we with our imperfect senses aare not even in an ability to know completely about our very own friend then what to speak of him?In buddhas case it showed his vairagya The concept of Vairāgya is found in the Yoga Sūtras of Patañjali, where it along with practice (abhyāsa), is the key to restraint of the modifications of the mind (YS 1.12, "abhyāsa-vairāgyabhyāṁ tannirodhaḥ"). The term vairāgya appears three times in the Bhagavad Gita (6.35, 13.8, 18.52) where it is recommended as a key means for bringing control to the restless mind. It is also the main topic of Mokṣopāya or Yoga Vasistha.

Another important text on renunciation is Vairāgya shataka or "100 verses of Renunciation", a part of the Śatakatraya collection by Bhartṛhari.So he was a perfect renunciant.This my very humble opinion i do accept the fact that this may be total nonsese or full with errors but still i do believe from the bottom of my heart that you would remove the errors and only take the pure essence of it.This is just an humble attempt as person trying to answer such a question is like a cat trying to drink the milk ocean.So i need your blessings for more such endeavours.Thank you 10000000 pranams.

Your question is too long to read and understand what exactly you wish to know. But as far as Hinduism is concern and charecters of Vibheeshana, Meera, Pralhad are concerned, these 3 individuals have were not happy to stay with negative personalities, so they left Ravana, Husband, Hiranya kashyap.

They did not left them suddenly. They tried their best to persuade them to give up wrongs and when failed they left.

Hope you understand this answer. Good individuals leave negative individuals. Do you think it is wrong? If you are in their place, what will you do?

At last, mythological stories are stories. with contradictions and exaggeration. One has to extract moral lessons and follow that moral lesson, that is it. Otherwise you are in jungle of arguments and doubts and at the end you do not gain any thing-except wastage of time.

Religious books in many religions, contain that material which can not corroborated easily. .So personally, I keep concern with that material from which I learn positive lessons. I do not bother about that material which is not convincing me.

yes of course! being a prince of ravan his rights are limited to "advise" ravan about dharma and adharma and he is supposed to follow the king and fight alongwith ravan . otherwise if he opinion is different then he should have kept quiet or get sanyas and slip away from the scene . but he not only joins with enemy and also (kaattikkodutthaar - sorry i can't bring it in english correctly) so he is certainly a traitor ettappanthaan

Not at all. Vibeeshan found that his brother was doing something bad which is why he supported Ram. Or put it simply he was supporting the right. A traitor is someone who cheats for a bad purpose and you wont call someone a traitor if he is against something bad and is supporting the good. Simply put Vibheeshan was 100000% correct. :)

if a terrorist son desert him and tell his father's plan of bombing a particular area to police while taking risk of his life will you call him a traitor from secular point of view or a brave person?like that vibhison kept righteousness and justice for seeta in first place and desreted his perveted brother for

sake of justice he was not a traitor and princess Meera nevere considered her materialistic family as family but kept God as first place devoted her whole life for God,see it from her prespective too,prince

prahlad was just like terrorist's son who chose justice above father,parshuram was very sad after killing her mother and everyone does mistake he did it too,Ram had exiled Sita and it was perdecided it was to show that woman can take lot of pain for husband and Rama performed his duty as king and sita supported her too,jesus accepted mary magdalene as discple but will you say bad people should be deprieved of God,should you just because a man is thief so he should be deprived of all human rights and prophet mohammed and Buddha were not God still whatever md did can be justified as many males died so he saved life of many woman by marrying them was not it a good thing while about freedom fighters even though they mary but when sense of responsiblity came to them how could they enjoy family life when whole nation was suffering,actually you are not seeing things from secular point of view but from negative point of view,if a man wears black spectacles everything look black to him but this dosent mean tha everything is black.

Sir..

I don't have an answer for your question,but yet im writing & the reason is that i want to be in touch with you if u please could tell me your facebook accound

moreover

your way of answering impressing me

also im having some problems

n i think u may solve with ur counsel plz be in touch with me

my fb is

satyajeet.shira@gmail.com

also Sir plz let me know yours

The perception of traitor or not bases on your view point.

Ravan's Lanka can be compared with Hitler's Nazi Germany, both extremely powerful and rich and have very good Generals. Yet both of them violated human right or went against Dharma. So in this case it was the legal Government who went against Dharma.

In Hitler's Nazi Germany, many Germans could not approve war, Holocaust, mass execution. So then some of them went against Hitler and revolted. Like Sophie Scholl and her brothers and few friends, Erwin Rommel(Himself was a distinguished Military General, perhaps best General in WW2), Von Stauffenberg(A colonel of Wehrmacht) they revolted were punished.

From Nazi perspective which is against Dharma they were traitors because they hampered German war machine, but from Humanitarian perspective they did well.

In Nazi Germany when people were brainwashed by Nazi propaganda machine then very few people still held good will. Same in Ravan's lanka Bivishon held the good will.

So all though German resistance leaders were portrayed as traitor, when Germans finally got rid off from Nazi doctrine they understood what leaders did was good.

Those who say Vibeeshan as traitor they must be against Aryan and pro-Non Aryan or ultra- Southern people from South india.

I hope you understand.

http://www.google.co.in/webhp?source=search_app&gw...

http://www.google.co.in/webhp?source=search_app&gw...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Br%C3%BCcke_(film...

http://www.google.co.in/webhp?source=search_app&gw...

very confusing thing lookup on to google or bing that can help