Yet more spam.
Directly related to the latter half of post 146 somewhere above: the comments by Rajeev and Witan concerning Vamana-Trivikrama and Bali at the Rajeev2004 blog (
rajeev2004.blogspot.com/2012/12/today-vamana-avatara-yesterday-more.html).
Was pawing through the Sundara Kaandam for someone else, when something caught the eye that seemed rather relevant to Rajeev's determined avowal that the account of Trivikrama's dealings with the asura Mahabali is "actually" a post-Buddhist allegory for some Buddhist persecution/replacement sobstory. Or Witan's equally self-certain opinion that the ancient Hindoo narrative "actually" pointed to the ousting of the (lately-invented) Dravoodianism instead.
Soon both "Hindu nationalists" will have to foreswear the Raamaayanam too :evil grin:, since - sadly - it doesn't seem to want to comply with the credo-s/subversionist dawaganda they have each sworn by.
Here. The online version of the shloka from the kaaNDam also confirms the relevance:
Have now found yet more relevant references, by searching for Trivikrama-related statements over the entirety of the ValmikiRamayanam site. Some selections follow. But am not pasting from the baalakaaNDam's equally-copious mentions of Vaamana-Trivikrama (and/or [his] dealings with Bali), but am instead sticking to the middle kaaNDas, since Hindoos are of course never allowed* to refer to the baalakaaNDam as substantiation for anything (except among their own kind, naturally). * To do with Elst Class Arguments.
But shlokas from the rest of the VAlmIki RAmAyaNam more than suffice to make the point of how the Trivikrama account is already familiar to the Ramayanam, and indeed, is considered by the Ramayanam to be an event earlier to itself - one that the protagonists of the epic (as well as the poet Valmeeki who described it) moreover seem to look back upon as 'quite long ago' with respect to themselves. Even the rather extremely long-lived King of [Teddy] Bears, Jambavaan, recalls the Trivikrama epoch with words of the "I remember back when I was younger..." variety, which surely is a sign - if ever there was one - of this being ur-history to the other Ramayanam characters. (BTW, Jaambavaan more than once refers to a grown Hanumaan as Taata - IIRC "(male) baby, little one, child". :lief
Not that any of the above is news to Hindoos: they're already aware from Hindu tradition that Trivikrama's manifestion is supposed to be in some era well before Rama. As opposed to recently concocted *Untradition* (unheathenism/subversion) that it was all "actually, originally" about some post-Buddhist event concerning Buddhism, where the "poor Buddhists"
ob: are - but of course - put upon by the evil-weevil Hindoos. Rinse and repeat the sobstory with Jains too, of course, and now also the recently-invented (but no less back-projected) Dravoodians, which last has been espoused by Witan almost as fervently as Rajeev champions the Buddhist version of the anti-Hindu propaganda. <- 'Hindu nationalists' both. Ah the valiant defence of Hindoo heathenism by modern Hindu nationalism. (I'd hate to meet *their* definition of subverted subversionists/unheathens/unHindus...)
And it's not just the protagonists of the Ramayanam that get compared to the mighty size, tread, bearing and lustre of Vishnu-Trivikrama. One raakShasa antagonist of the Ramayanam at least gets a share of the complimentary comparison too here - Kumbhakarna. From my understanding, he's supposed to be a giant among giants and doubtless takes over the horizon as well, thus sort of reminiscent of Trivikrama:
"Poor" Hindu nationalist Witan: Rajeev shouted him down unfairly (rajeev2004.blogspot.com/2012/12/today-vamana-avatara-yesterday-more.html) for Witan having lamely fallen for dravoodian dawaganda (as only subvertibles could), when Rajeev himself fell no less willingly for the equally-false Buddhist propaganda, and batted for and peddled the latter as hard as Witan did the Dravoodian variant.
Yet the Ramayanam is in disagreement with both.
How utterly easy modern angelsk-speaking Hindus esp. vocalists are. So easy to subvert. One can only shudder in utter disgust.
Well, at least there's no undoing subversion, no backpeddling being possible in such cases: people must live with the consequences of their choices, and the bridges they burnt while making them. After all, Rajeev - and Witan - did insist with such vehemence and such certainty, and attempt to convince not just each other but their readership.
Directly related to the latter half of post 146 somewhere above: the comments by Rajeev and Witan concerning Vamana-Trivikrama and Bali at the Rajeev2004 blog (
rajeev2004.blogspot.com/2012/12/today-vamana-avatara-yesterday-more.html).
Was pawing through the Sundara Kaandam for someone else, when something caught the eye that seemed rather relevant to Rajeev's determined avowal that the account of Trivikrama's dealings with the asura Mahabali is "actually" a post-Buddhist allegory for some Buddhist persecution/replacement sobstory. Or Witan's equally self-certain opinion that the ancient Hindoo narrative "actually" pointed to the ousting of the (lately-invented) Dravoodianism instead.
Soon both "Hindu nationalists" will have to foreswear the Raamaayanam too :evil grin:, since - sadly - it doesn't seem to want to comply with the credo-s/subversionist dawaganda they have each sworn by.
Here. The online version of the shloka from the kaaNDam also confirms the relevance:
Quote:valmikiramayan.net/utf8/sundara/sarga1/sundara_1_frame.htm
à ¤¤à ¤¦à ¥Âà ¤°à ¥âà ¤ªà ¤®à ¤¤à ¤¿à ¤¸à ¤âà ¤â¢Ã Â¥Âà ¤·à ¤¿à ¤ªà ¥Âà ¤¯ à ¤¹à ¤¨à ¥Âà ¤®à ¤¾à ¤¨à ¥ à ¤ªà ¥Âà ¤°à ¤â¢Ã Â¥ÆÃ ¤¤à ¥Šà ¤¸à ¥ÂÃ Â¤Â¥Ã Â¤Â¿Ã Â¤Â¤Ã Â¤Æ || à ¥«-à ¥§-à ¥¨à ¥¦à ¥¬
à ¤¤à ¥Âà ¤°à ¥â¬Ã ¤¨à ¥ à ¤â¢Ã Â¥Âà ¤°à ¤®à ¤¾à ¤¨à ¤¿à ¤µ à ¤µà ¤¿à ¤â¢Ã Â¥Âà ¤°à ¤®à ¥Âà ¤¯ à ¤¬à ¤²à ¤¿à ¤µà ¥â¬Ã ¤°à ¥ÂÃ Â¤Â¯Ã Â¤Â¹Ã Â¤Â°Ã Â¥â¹ Ã Â¤Â¹Ã Â¤Â°Ã Â¤Â¿Ã Â¤Æ |
[tadrUpam ati saMkShipya hanumAn prakR^itau sthitaH || 5-1-206
trIn kramAn iva vikramya balivIryaharo hariH | ]
206. hanumaan = Hanuma; atisaMkshipya = greatly reducing (His size); prakR^itau sthitaH = became (normal) in nature; tat = (regaining) that; ruupam = (original) appearance; hariH iva = liKe Vishnu; baliviiryaharaH = who mitigated the strength of Bali; triin kramaan vikramya = by taking three strides.
Hanuma greatly reducing His size became normal in nature regaining His original form, like Vishnu who mitigated the strength of Bali by taking three strides.
(Another commentator explains what is actually implictly obvious in the above
HanumÃÂn shed his colossal form to resume his small form, like MahÃÂ Vishnu, after pushing Bali down into PÃÂtÃÂla LÃ Âka, resuming His Incarnate form of VÃÂmana.
Have now found yet more relevant references, by searching for Trivikrama-related statements over the entirety of the ValmikiRamayanam site. Some selections follow. But am not pasting from the baalakaaNDam's equally-copious mentions of Vaamana-Trivikrama (and/or [his] dealings with Bali), but am instead sticking to the middle kaaNDas, since Hindoos are of course never allowed* to refer to the baalakaaNDam as substantiation for anything (except among their own kind, naturally). * To do with Elst Class Arguments.
But shlokas from the rest of the VAlmIki RAmAyaNam more than suffice to make the point of how the Trivikrama account is already familiar to the Ramayanam, and indeed, is considered by the Ramayanam to be an event earlier to itself - one that the protagonists of the epic (as well as the poet Valmeeki who described it) moreover seem to look back upon as 'quite long ago' with respect to themselves. Even the rather extremely long-lived King of [Teddy] Bears, Jambavaan, recalls the Trivikrama epoch with words of the "I remember back when I was younger..." variety, which surely is a sign - if ever there was one - of this being ur-history to the other Ramayanam characters. (BTW, Jaambavaan more than once refers to a grown Hanumaan as Taata - IIRC "(male) baby, little one, child". :lief

Not that any of the above is news to Hindoos: they're already aware from Hindu tradition that Trivikrama's manifestion is supposed to be in some era well before Rama. As opposed to recently concocted *Untradition* (unheathenism/subversion) that it was all "actually, originally" about some post-Buddhist event concerning Buddhism, where the "poor Buddhists"
ob: are - but of course - put upon by the evil-weevil Hindoos. Rinse and repeat the sobstory with Jains too, of course, and now also the recently-invented (but no less back-projected) Dravoodians, which last has been espoused by Witan almost as fervently as Rajeev champions the Buddhist version of the anti-Hindu propaganda. <- 'Hindu nationalists' both. Ah the valiant defence of Hindoo heathenism by modern Hindu nationalism. (I'd hate to meet *their* definition of subverted subversionists/unheathens/unHindus...)Quote:valmikiramayan.net/ayodhya/sarga14/ayodhya_14_frame.htm
evam pracoditaH raajaa kaikeyyaa nirvishankayaa |
na ashakat paasham unmoktum balir indra kRtam yathaa || 2-14-11
11. evam= Thus, prachoditaH= by Kaikeyi, nirvishaNkayaa= without hesitation, rajaa= king Dasaratha, indrakR^itam yathaa= as trapped by Indra, naa shakat= was not able, moktum= to untie, paasham= the cord.
Thus compelled by Kaikeyi, who had no uneasiness in her mind, king Dasaratha could not untie the cord of plighted word that fettered him , any more than Bali could unloose the noose placed (round his body) by Indra(through his younger brother Vamana in order to deprive him of his sovereignty of the three worlds).
[The reference appears to be to how IIRC Asura king Bali was performing a yagnya and was therefore compelled - as planned by Mahendra and MahaVishnu - to grant as daanam in this case three steps-worth of his territory to the little braahmana Vaamana that had appeared at the rite and requested it. Bali had promised to grant it and thus was already fettered by his word for giving the daanam, just as Dasaratha was also fettered by his word to grant one or more boons whose implications were unknown to him at the time of giving his word.]
valmikiramayan.net/kishkindha/sarga40/kishkindhaitrans40.htm
tatra puurvam padam kR^itvaa puraa viSNuH trivikrame |
dvitiiyam shikharam meroH cakaara puruSottamaH || 4-40-58
58. puruSa uttamaH= Person, Supreme; viSNuH= Vishnu; puraa trivikrame= earlier, in Trivikrama incarnation; puurvam= firstly; tatra= there - on that peak; padam kR^itvaa= foot - foothold, making; dvitiiyam= second one - foot; meroH shikharam cakaara= on Mt. Meru's, peak, he made - he placed.
"Earlier while treading the three worlds in the incarnation of Trivikrama, the Supreme Person Vishnu made His first foothold on that pinnacle Saumanasa, and the second on the pinnacle of Mt. Meru to tread the heavens. [4-40-58]
valmikiramayan.net/kishkindha/sarga65/kishkindhaitrans65.htm
taan ca sarvaan hari shreSThaan jaa.mbavaan idam abraviit |
na khalu etaavat eva aasiit gamane me paraakramaH || 4-65-14
14. sarvaan taan hari shreSThaan= to all of, those, to monkey, best ones; jaambavaan idam ca abraviit= Jambavanta, this, also, said; me gamane paraakramaH= to me, in [the stint of] going, capability; etaavat eva= thereunto, only; na aasiit khalu= not, is there [limited,] definitely.
Jambavanta further said this to all of those best monkeys, "my capability in the stint of going was not definitely limited only thereunto... [4-65-14]
mayaa vairocane yaj~ne prabhaviSNuH sanaatanaH |
pradakSiNii kR^itaH puurvam kramamaaNaH trivikramaH || 4-65-15
15. maya= by me; puurvam= once; vairocane yaj~ne= in Vairocana's legatee's [Emperor Bali's,] Vedic-ritual's - at the time of]; kramamaaNaH= when He was treading; prabhaviSNuH= Omnipresent; sanaatanaH= Eternal [Vishnu]; trivikramaH= [in the incarnation of] Trivikrama; pradakSiNii kR^itaH= circumambulation, He was made by me.
"Once I have performed circumambulation around the Omnipresent and Eternal Vishnu in His incarnation as Trivikrama, when He grandiosely increased His physique from that of a Divine-Dwarfish Brahman boy to that of an Omnidirectional Being, thus filling whole of the Universe to tread all the three worlds, during the time of Vedic-ritual of Emperor Bali, the legatee of Vairocana... [4-65-15]
(IIRC Jambavaan is still speaking
valmikiramayan.net/kishkindha/sarga66/kishkindhaitrans66.htm
trivikrame mayaa taata sa shaila vana kaananaa |
triH sapta kR^itvaH pR^ithivii parikraantaa pradakSiNam || 4-66-32
32. taata= oh, dear boy; trivikrame= in Trivikrama [during the period of incarnation]; sa shaila vana kaananaa= with, mountains, forests, thickets; pR^ithivii= earth is; maya= by me; triH sapta kR^itvaH= three*seven= twenty-one, times, on making - multiplying; pradakSiNam parikraantaa= circumambulations, moved around.
"During the period of Trivikrama incarnation I have circumambulated the earth inclusive of its mountains, forests and thickets for twenty-one times, moving rightward around it... [4-66-32]
viSaaNNaa harayaH sarve hanuman kim upekSase |
vikramasva mahaavega viSNuH triin vikramaan iva || 4-66-37
37. hanuman= oh, Hanuma; sarve harayaH viSaaNNaa= all, monkeys, are dispirited; kim upekSase= why, indolence of yours; mahaa vega= highly, speedy [speedier than sound, light and thought - supersonic, super-photic, super-cerebric;]; viSNuH triin [lokaan] vikramaan iva= Vishnu, three [who trod the triad of worlds in a trice,] trod, as with; vi kramasva= boldly, triumph over. {(aadaraartham punarukti) vi kramasva= boldly, triumph over.}
"Oh, Hanuma, all these monkeys are dispirited. Why this indolence of yours? You boldly triumph over the ocean as your speed is highest, supersonic, super-photic, super-cerebric is your celerity. As with Vishnu who trod the triad of worlds in a trice, you too triumph over..." Thus Jambavanta persuaded Hanuma to get ready for action. [4-66-37]
valmikiramayan.net/kishkindha/sarga67/kishkindhaitrans67.htm
prahR^iSTaa vismitaaH ca api te viikshante sama.ntataH |
trivikrama kR^ita utsaaham naaraayaNam iva prajaaH || 4-67-3
3. samantataH= all over [available]; te= those [monkeys]; pra hR^iSTaa= altogether, buoyed up; vismitaaH ca api= utterly, astounded, also, even; prajaaH= [as with] people; trivikrama kR^ita utsaaham= in Trivikrama [incarnation,] made [when tri-world was trodden by Vishnu,] enthusiastically [as with the enthusiasm then shown by the people]; naaraayaNam iva viikshante= at Narayana, as with, [monkeys] are seeing [at Hanuma.]
Those monkeys available all over there are altogether buoyed up and utterly astounded, and as with the people who have enthusiastically seen Narayana when He maximised His physique to tread the triad of worlds in His Trivikrama incarnation, these monkeys too are looking at Hanuma who is now maximising his body. [4-67-3]
valmikiramayan.net/aranya/sarga39/aranyaitrans39.htm
aham tasya prabhaavaj~no na yuddham tena te kshamam |
balim vaa namuci.m vaa api hanyaddhi raghun.na.ndana || 4-39-19
19. aham tasya prabhaava j~naH= I am, of his, efficacy, knower of; te= to you; tena= with him; yuddham na kshamam= war, not, fair enough; raghun nadana= Ragu's, descendant - Rama; balim vaa namucim vaa api= Emperor Bali, either, Namuchi, or, even; hanyat hi= can kill, in fact.
"I am well-acquainted with his efficacy, and a war with him will be an unfair thing for you, for that Raghu's descendant can in fact kill either Emperor Bali or Namuchi, the demon. [4-39-19]
Emperor Bali is more powerful and mighty than Ravana. aananda raamaayana says in a chapter on the 'defeats of Ravana' raavaNa paraajaya, that Ravana once entered netherworld to conquer it, where Bali is held captive by Trivikrama, i.e., Vishnu. At that time Bali and his queen are playing dice game. When Ravana entered, the dice in the hand of Bali has slipped to the floor, and Bali asks Ravana to pick and give it before conquering netherworld. Ravana who lifted Mt. Kailash could not lift that two-inch dice, which is so far handled playfully by Bali. Such is the might of Emperor Bali
And it's not just the protagonists of the Ramayanam that get compared to the mighty size, tread, bearing and lustre of Vishnu-Trivikrama. One raakShasa antagonist of the Ramayanam at least gets a share of the complimentary comparison too here - Kumbhakarna. From my understanding, he's supposed to be a giant among giants and doubtless takes over the horizon as well, thus sort of reminiscent of Trivikrama:
Quote:valmikiramayan.net/yuddha/sarga61/yuddhaitrans61.htm
tam dR^iSTvaa raakSasashreSTham parvataakaaradarshanam |
kramamaaNamivaakaasham puraa naaraayaNam prabhum || 6-61-2
2. dR^iSTvaa= seeing; tam raakSasashreSTham= that paramount demon; parvataakaara darshanam= whose appearance was in the form of a mountain; prabhum naaraayaNam yathaa= looking like Lord Narayana (the son of the original Man); kramamaaNam= taking strides across; aakaasham= space; puraa= long ago (manifested in the form of Trivikrama, who measured the whole universe in a couple of strides) Rama became vigilant).
Seeing that paramount demon, whose appearance was in the form of a mountain and looking like Lord Narayana (the son of the original Man); taking strides across space, (manifested in the form of Trivikrama, who measured the whole universe in a couple of strides) Rama became vigilant.
valmikiramayan.net/yuddha/sarga65/yuddha_65_frame.htm
sarvaabharaNanaddhaaN^gaH shuulapaaNiH sa raakShasaH |
trivikramakR^itotsaaho naaraayaNa ivaababhau || 6-65-31
31. sarvaabharaNa sarvaaN^gaH= adorned with all ornaments to all his limbs; shuulapaaNiH= with a spike in his hand; saH= that; raakSasaH= demons; aababhau= shone; naaraayanaH iva= like Narayana, the all-embracing Lord; trivikrama kR^itotsaahaH= enthusiastic to take the three long strides (which were meant to cover the entire universe).
Adorned with all ornaments to all his limbs and with a spike in his hand, that demon shone like Narayana, the all-embracing Lord, enthusiastic to take the three long strides (which were meant to cover the entire universe).
"Poor" Hindu nationalist Witan: Rajeev shouted him down unfairly (rajeev2004.blogspot.com/2012/12/today-vamana-avatara-yesterday-more.html) for Witan having lamely fallen for dravoodian dawaganda (as only subvertibles could), when Rajeev himself fell no less willingly for the equally-false Buddhist propaganda, and batted for and peddled the latter as hard as Witan did the Dravoodian variant.
Yet the Ramayanam is in disagreement with both.
How utterly easy modern angelsk-speaking Hindus esp. vocalists are. So easy to subvert. One can only shudder in utter disgust.
Well, at least there's no undoing subversion, no backpeddling being possible in such cases: people must live with the consequences of their choices, and the bridges they burnt while making them. After all, Rajeev - and Witan - did insist with such vehemence and such certainty, and attempt to convince not just each other but their readership.
Death to traitors.

