Shloka 48
वालिवधः — Vālī’s Fall and Dharma-Accusation
Kiṣkindhā Sarga 17
मामेव यदि पूर्वं त्वमेतदर्थमचोदयः।।मैथिलीमहमेकाह्ना तव चानीतवान्भवेत्।सुग्रीवप्रियकामेन यदहं निहतस्त्वया।कण्ठे बद्ध्वा प्रदद्यां ते निहतं रावणं रणे।।
mām eva yadi pūrvaṃ tvam etad-artham acodayaḥ | maithilīm aham ekāhnā tava cānītavān bhavet | sugrīvapriyakāmena yad ahaṃ nihatas tvayā | kaṇṭhe baddhvā pradadyāṃ te nihataṃ rāvaṇaṃ raṇe ||
Nếu trước đây ngươi vì việc này mà đến nói với ta, thì chỉ trong một ngày ta đã có thể đem Maithilī trở về cho ngươi. Nay ngươi giết ta để làm vừa lòng Sugrīva; hãy biết rằng ta cũng có thể giết Rāvaṇa giữa trận và trói cổ hắn mà trao tận tay ngươi.
'Had you sought my help earlier(before you met Sugriva), I would have restored Sita to you within a single day. I have been killed by you to oblige Sugriva. I would have handed over Ravana by the neck after killing him in the battle.
FAQs
It highlights dharma as discerning right means, not only desired ends: Vāli suggests that political aims (pleasing Sugrīva) shaped Rāma’s action, raising questions about impartial righteousness.
Vāli argues that Rāma could have secured Sītā and even neutralized Rāvaṇa through Vāli’s help, implying Rāma chose a path tied to Sugrīva’s interests.
Strategic capability and confidence (vīrya), alongside the implied virtue of choosing allies and methods carefully under dharma.