Why was Mahabali killed?

[Nacchinarkiniyan]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

We teach our children that God took different incarnations to destroy evil and protect the world.

But a question which was asked by my children and for which I had no answer was "Why was King Mahabali killed?"

King Mahabali was a good king.He was renowned for his charitable works. The people in his kingdom were happy. These are not disputed by any one.

He was also tthe grand son of Prahlada the foremost Bhaktha of Vishnu.

Then why did it become necessary for Vishnu to take an Avatara with the specific purpose of killing him?

Is it because he was an Asura who had become very powerful and thus incurred the jealousy/wrath of the Devas?

The oft repeated reason that he was full of ego and was full of pride does not wash. These are not evil from which the world had to be saved. All Kings were ego centric and proud. Indira was never known to be humble.

Did Vishnu kill him as a representative of the Devas?

 

[Visalakshi Ramani]

dear Sir,

Trivikrama/Vaman DID NOT KILL king Mahabali.

He was sent down to Paataala, where he is still supposed to be living.

He comes to the earth once a year to visit his kingdom. On that day the

present citizens of his country decorate it with flower kolams and

welcome him amidst them with songs, dances and feasts.

You must have heard the proverb

Kaanam vithengilum onam kazhikkanum!

Vishnu had promised Prahlada (after killing Hiranya Kasipu) that He

would never ever kill any descendant Prahlad.

He did keep His promise and Bali was merely banished to another world

at another level.

with warm regards,
Mrs. V.R.

 

[Nacchinarkiniyan]

Why was he banished? What was his mistake? He was not evil. Why punish a Good King? So GOD at least in Vishnu form will punish even good people just because they are not born Devas? I find that difficult to accept.

By the way the Asuras reside in Pataala. At the end of Devi Mahatmyam it is mentioned that all Asuras went off to Pataala. In all other Puranic stories, the Asuras were portrayed as bad people who troubled the Devas. At least in those stories they (Mahishasura and others) were not portrayed as Good Kings.

The Kerala story about Onam is not part of the original Puranas.

 

[sangom]

Why was he banished? What was his mistake? He was not evil. Why punish a Good King? So GOD at least in Vishnu form will punish even good people just because they are not born Devas? I find that difficult to accept.

By the way the Asuras reside in Pataala. At the end of Devi Mahatmyam it is mentioned that all Asuras went off to Pataala. In all other Puranic stories, the Asuras were portrayed as bad people who troubled the Devas. At least in those stories they (Mahishasura and others) were not portrayed as Good Kings.

The Kerala story about Onam is not part of the original Puranas.

In those ancient days (just as it is even today for some) things were very much B&W; if you are not with me/us, you are against us. And there were many cunning fellows who could carry tales to someone's ears and make things happen the very way they wanted or scripted it. Narada is the epitome of such people.

Bali desired for the post of Indra (Rs.80/= to Rs.120/= of those clerical days!). But the powers-that-be had already accepted some favours in advance (probably) and had despatched a letter of appointment by Regd. A.D. Post to some other xyz. Lest the கந்தரகோளம் (gol maal) came out into the open and fouled the entire swarga and bhooloka, the only way out was to give a "quotation job"; vishnu was the sole quotation master then in all the three worlds and so he was given it. He despatched one puny brahman (Bahman> baaman> vaamana) in his gang and he did the job marvellously. Since kollywood did not exist then, no movie could be made and only a long sanskrit poem could be written about the excellent quotation job done (Mission accomplished). But this is proof that bamans can do "any job" if only it is for God

 

[renuka]

Many will not belive what i write but I read before that even though Mahabali was the epitome of virtue he still had some trace of ahankar in him.. and even when Vamana Avatar asked him the famous 3 measurements of land he was temporary puffed up that how come Vamana was only asking that much and felt some sort of proud that he was all mighty and powerful.

Then when he saw Vamana grow in dimensions and he could not give the 3rd measure of land..he knew this must be Lord Vishnu and offered his head to be step upon by Lord Vishnu even though Sukracharya had told him not to.

Mahabali had utmost bhakti for God and it was this trace of ahankar in him that Mahavishnu had come to "remove" cos God knew Mahabali was next to prefection and hence he was offered what is said in post #2

God helps the true devotee shed the 6 enemies--- Kama,Krodha, Lobha,Moha,Mada,Matsarya.

 

[Nacchinarkiniyan]

If Vishnu takes an avatara just to punish a Bhakta who has Ahamkara, then he will have to take billions of Avataras. And why did he punish only Mahabali? And not the many Indiras and others who were all epitomes of not only Ahankara but much worse.

If we we accept that because he is a Bhakta and Vishnu wanted to give him salvation, then the entire concept of Bhakthi will turn on its head. There will be no Bhakthas.

God helps the true devotee shed the 6 enemies--- Kama,Krodha, Lobha,Moha,Mada,Matsarya.

Strange way of removal. GOD does not punish his Bhaktha. All Bhakthas request GOD to remove the six enemies. But GOD does not punish them. He removes the six enemies. That is when one achieves self-realization.

Bhakthi leads to salvation not punishment by GOD.

 

[subbudu1]

If Vishnu takes an avatara just to punish a Bhakta who has Ahamkara, then he will have to take billions of Avataras. And why did he punish only Mahabali? And not the many Indiras and others who were all epitomes of not only Ahankara but much worse.

If we we accept that because he is a Bhakta and Vishnu wanted to give him salvation, then the entire concept of Bhakthi will turn on its head. There will be no Bhakthas.

Strange way of removal. GOD does not punish his Bhaktha. All Bhakthas request GOD to remove the six enemies. But GOD does not punish them. He removes the six enemies. That is when one achieves self-realization.

Bhakthi leads to salvation not punishment by GOD.

I dont have this information. But my question is even if Mahabali was a good ruler, was he doing the right things for the world?
Mahabali's associates were Asuras . What information we have on the harm that could be caused by his associates to the world? My third question is , was Mahabali a better ruler than Devas? Was he justly claiming for their position?

If these questions are answered then we know who is right and who is wrong

I had this question because in the stories I have heard since childhood, it has been projected that if Mahabali had taken control of the world then it would have spelt doom, with Asuras assuming leadership.

 

[Visalakshi Ramani]

Everyone on earth is the amsam of Vishnu- may not be as spectacular,

impressive and imposing as Vaamana and Trivikrama!

We are all set so as to keep in check one another's ego, pride, ahankaara

and mamakaara!

That is the gist of all the transactions taking place in the world all the

time, everywhere.

God's form in its true glory cannot be eyed by anyone!

That is why He appears in human form.

Even Arjuna was given a divya dhrushti to be able to see the cosmic form

of the Lord-His viswaroopam.

The war goes on as you can very well see- between the good

and the bad among people and even in every person's mind! :fencing:

 

[Raghy]

Respectable members, Greetings.

Mahabali was not killed.

As a kid, I was told, he was given a honour on that Thiruvonam day. He was 'requested' to stay in Paatala Logam. He was a hero for me from those days. A hero, better than even all the Devas put together ; on top of that, a just king who looked after his subjects welfare well.

But, why was he restricted to Paatala Logam in favour of worthlesss Indra? (My grandmother often times said Indra was worthless, bad character, unfair in fighting etc..). It seems, Mahabali pushed for Indra post before the end of that time Indra's contract was completed. Maha Bali is said to be ruling Paatala Logam and when next Indra job gets advertised, it would be either Maha Bali or Hanuman getting the job. That was the grapevine information obtained by my late grandmother anyway.

She also said Maha Bali was so good, he was given 'Chiranjeevi' (Sthiram Jeevi) status. He visits his kingdom on Onam day every year. So, the thread title itself is questionable. ( I have no Malayalee background; although Onam was never 'celebrated', that day had its significance in our home).

On saturdays while forcing us in the 'oil applying ritual' for oil bath, the girls would be blessed with the names of 'Padhi vradhas' and the boys would be blessed with the names of 'Chiranjeevis'. Maha Bali's name is the first on the list. The list of Chranjeevis (there are 8 of them). Chiranjivi - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Cheers!

 

[Nacchinarkiniyan]

We pray to God.

Abadbhandava! Anadharakshaka! Bhakthavatsala!

Not Bhaktasamhari!

The Mahabali episode shows the reason why Hinduism has become unpopular among the younger generation.

We refuse to accept that it was out of character for Vishnu to have punished Mahabali. In Mahabharata we read about Krishna running to the aid of Drowpadi when she calls him when she is about to be disrobed. Drowpadi is known for her Ahamkara. We read about Vishnu coming to the aid of an elephant at the time of its distress.

Then we have this Mahabali episode.

And strangely we refuse to accept that it was wrong. We refuse to accept that the Vali episode in Ramayana Rama was wrong.

We try to explain and offer lame reasons for such inconsistencies rather than accepting them and moving on.

And then we cry that the younger generation is not impressed with Hinduism.

 

[Visalakshi Ramani]

If Vali would gain half the strength of his opponent, he was practically

invincible! More over his behavior similar to that of a wild animal,

justifies Rama's hunting him as any other wild animal in the forest.

Droupadi did not get Krishna's help as long as she was struggling with

her ahankaara and ego. Krishna rushed to her help only when she

stopped struggling and surrendered completely to Him.

The same thing with Gejendra. The tug of war between the elephant and

crocodile went on for a thousand years. Only when the elephant

surrendered completely and stopped struggling, God rushed to help him.

If the youngsters do not believe in Hinduism it is the fault of the elders

who are not able to convine them- as our forefathers convinced us!

So first we must learn the facts well and then try to impress the younger

generation!.

Have you noticed the increasing crowd of youngsters in any spiritual

discourse now a days. They lack people to guide them properly in this age

of chaos and confusion! But we are pouring fuel on fire!

No one can tarnish, diminish or deteriorate the greatness of Hinduism.

It had to stand up against the attacks from the other religions!

Now it has to face the onslaught of the insiders in addition to that from

the outsiders!! Two pronged attack-to put it in a nutshell!

 

[renuka]

If Vishnu takes an avatara just to punish a Bhakta who has Ahamkara, then he will have to take billions of Avataras. And why did he punish only Mahabali? And not the many Indiras and others who were all epitomes of not only Ahankara but much worse.

If we we accept that because he is a Bhakta and Vishnu wanted to give him salvation, then the entire concept of Bhakthi will turn on its head. There will be no Bhakthas.

Strange way of removal. GOD does not punish his Bhaktha. All Bhakthas request GOD to remove the six enemies. But GOD does not punish them. He removes the six enemies. That is when one achieves self-realization.

Bhakthi leads to salvation not punishment by GOD.

Dear Nacchi,

I didnt mention anywhere that Mahabali was punished.That was not punishment.

In day to day life many of us go through enough testing times which make a change in our behavior and outlook.
We cant call that punishment..thats whats learning is all about in the Ocean of Samasara.
Sometimes we have to realize with our Antahkarana and not with our senses.


May be Madhuraasthakam will make you understand better..everything of the Lord is Nothing but sweetness.


http://youtu.be/Tan_Vsmlsso

 

[Visalakshi Ramani]

We can never convince anyone else unless

we ourselves are convinced of that fact first.

A blind man can not lead another blind man!

A theory does not automatically become false

because we DO NOT want to believe in it!

God and His actions are too complicated to be explained

by mere empty words without any faith.

Finally our refusing or accepting,

our ignoring or cherishing

believing or not believing

will not affect HIM in any way!

He is beyond all these things!

They will surely affect us in every way!

 

[sangom]

On saturdays while forcing us in the 'oil applying ritual' for oil bath, the girls would be blessed with the names of 'Padhi vradhas' and the boys would be blessed with the names of 'Chiranjeevis'. Maha Bali's name is the first on the list. The list of Chranjeevis (there are 8 of them). Chiranjivi - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Cheers!

Raghy,

The sloka is "aswatthaamaa balirvyaasaH hanumanca vibheeshanaH | krpa parasuraamasya saptaite ciramjeevinaaH ||". Bali ranks next to the ill-fated aswatthaama !

 

[CLN]

Lord Vishnu being the Supreme Being, what all He did is Right; and because what all He did is Right, all those punished by Him were bad; and because all those people were bad, He punished them. He was always Right because He is the Supreme Being.....(Repeat ad infinitum.)

Seeming inconsistencies and injustices committed by Lord Vishnu are simply swept off by Bhagavatas by the above circuitous logic!

1. Vaali is to be dubbed bad, because Rama killed him, and Rama killed him; therefore he was bad!
2. Bali is to be dubbed bad, because Vishnu banished him to Paathaalam, and Vishnu banished him; therefore he was bad!

"Vishnu is always right because He is the Supreme Being" is best exemplified by 'Ajamila Charithram'. The Omniscient Supreme Being Vishnu knew all too well that Ajamila did NOT think of Bhagawan Narayana when he uttered that magic word, but it did not matter at all; He was pleased and so, Ajamila got into the 'superfast expressway' to Vishnuloka, all sins written off and even Yama's preliminary Inquiry discarded! Why? Of course because, Lord Vishnu is the Supreme Being; and He can do what pleased Him and none dare question His actions!

So, all Tamil Brahmins Forum Members, you have a clear choice now in front of you. Those of you who accept the Lord's actions, you may stay on Earth; others, please pack up and go to Paathaalam. Bali is awaiting your arrival there!

 

[renuka]

We pray to God.

Abadbhandava! Anadharakshaka! Bhakthavatsala!

Not Bhaktasamhari!

The Mahabali episode shows the reason why Hinduism has become unpopular among the younger generation.

We refuse to accept that it was out of character for Vishnu to have punished Mahabali. In Mahabharata we read about Krishna running to the aid of Drowpadi when she calls him when she is about to be disrobed. Drowpadi is known for her Ahamkara. We read about Vishnu coming to the aid of an elephant at the time of its distress.

Then we have this Mahabali episode.

And strangely we refuse to accept that it was wrong. We refuse to accept that the Vali episode in Ramayana Rama was wrong.

We try to explain and offer lame reasons for such inconsistencies rather than accepting them and moving on.

And then we cry that the younger generation is not impressed with Hinduism.

Dear Nacchi,

I disagree with you that Hinduism is not impressive to youngsters as I do see many youngsters these days very interested in taking their religion seriously.
Yes... they question more..but not as to ridicule but to get to the hidden woven message and thats where guidance comes in as correctly mentioned by Vishalakshi Ramani.

See that way anyone can even comment on any religion and find fault if we start looking into other religions too but that I wont do cos that not right since its our dharma to respect all religions.

Sanathana Dharma is Santhana..It speaks for Itself..It was there before anyone of us took our 1st breath.
If it is really that Unimpressive may be those who think so should start looking for alternative impressive methods of Final Rites for their inevitable death.

P.S. for a start what about Coke and Doughnuts to replace Pinda and Water for those who want an impressive send off.

 

[sangom]

I dont have this information. But my question is even if Mahabali was a good ruler, was he doing the right things for the world?
Mahabali's associates were Asuras . What information we have on the harm that could be caused by his associates to the world? My third question is , was Mahabali a better ruler than Devas? Was he justly claiming for their position?

If these questions are answered then we know who is right and who is wrong

I had this question because in the stories I have heard since childhood, it has been projected that if Mahabali had taken control of the world then it would have spelt doom, with Asuras assuming leadership.

Shri Subbudu,

Prahlada was a staunch Vishnubhakta (VB), you may (have to) agree. Prahlada was crowned as the emperor of paataala by Vishnu in his narasimhavataar episode. Prahlaada being an incurable VB, he once went to a pilgrimage and there got a damn good thrashing from "naranarayanas" (two rishis who were invincible) and came back to paataala and made Andhaka, s/o Hiranyaaksha (Periyappa of Prahlada) as the ruler and went back to Badarikasrama, did extreme penance (tapasya) till the Naranarayanas again appeared in front of him. He craved for their pardoning him for his past misadventure of going to war with them and they gave him pardon, freedom from that sin etc. So, our purified VB comes back to PaataaLa and makes Bali, his grandson (s/o Virochana) as the next emperor. In line with the family traditions Bali rules but as an enemy of Devas. And this is the clincher, "Friend of my koojas' enemies is an enemy", or "An enemy of my eulogisers is my enemy too". Hence no further justification was required to spot "ahamkaara" in Bali, the absolute need to eliminate it for universal welfare, etc. Apply the following values (equivalents),

Bali= Saddam Hussain
Vishnu= GB jr.
Ahamkaaram= WMD, etc., and you will find that the Lord God is still alive and kicking in the 21st. century

 

[renuka]

Shri Subbudu,

Prahlada was a staunch Vishnubhakta (VB), you may (have to) agree. Prahlada was crowned as the emperor of paataala by Vishnu in his narasimhavataar episode. Prahlaada being an incurable VB, he once went to a pilgrimage and there got a damn good thrashing from "naranarayanas" (two rishis who were invincible) and came back to paataala and made Andhaka, s/o Hiranyaaksha (Periyappa of Prahlada) and went back to Badarikasrama, did extreme penance (tapasya) and the Naranarayanas appeared in front of him. He craved for their excusing him for his past misadventure of going to war with them and they gave him freedom from that sin. So, our purified VB comes back to PaataaLa and makes Bali, his grandson (s/o Virochana) as the next emperor. In line with the family traditions Bali rules but as an enemy of Devas. And this is the clincher, "Friend of my koojas' enemies is an enemy", or "An enemy of my eulogisers is my enemy too". Hence no further justification was required to spot "ahamkaara" in Bali, the absolute need to eliminate it for universal welfare, etc. Apply the equivalents,

Bali= Saddam Hussain
Vishnu= GB jr.
Ahamkaaram= WMD, etc., and you will find that the Lord God is still alive and kicking in the 21st. century

Ok you had mentioned before that Obama = Krishna..
We still have 1 vacant slot....

And Osama Bin Laden is.??????

 

[Nacchinarkiniyan]

I had some years back stirred up a similar controversy when I questioned Lakshmana's behavior towards Parimala. Lakshmana's actions were unpardonable and can not be justified under any circumstances. He would have been charged with outraging the modesty of a woman or worse according to IPC, had he lived today.

The reactions of some of the members were the same then also.

1. How dare you question the action of a God?

2. This is an attack on Hinduism.

Many Hindus are in the habit of taking a defensive position when any one questions the inconsistencies/contradictions in the Epics and Puranas.

When Valmiki wrote the Ramayana Rama was an ideal King and not an Avathara of Vishnu. Rama was made an Avathara by the later writers in for propagation of Vaishnavism. The extreme case of this is Adhyatma Ramayana.

Adhyatma Ramayana - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please go through this. This offers another explanation of Vamana's actions.

I believe in GOD and Bhakthi.

Vamana Avathara is against the basic conception of Bhakthi.

Krishna in Mahabharata embodied the principles of Bhakthi. I will start a separate thread for that.

 

[Nara]

.... Lakshmana's behavior towards Parimala.

Urmila, no?

 

[Nacchinarkiniyan]

It is Parimala. You may know her by another name.

 

[Visalakshi Ramani]

First it was equating present day villains with the heroes of the past.

now renaming of their wives...

and/or finding new stories to tarnish the names of those heroes!

And everything built on a very shaky foundation...

Want to know what it is...?
Calling a chiranjeevee as a dead person!

Remember more people (besides the good king Bali)

are waiting for those who opt to go to paataalaa! :evil:

 

[Nara]

....Seeming inconsistencies and injustices committed by Lord Vishnu are simply swept off by Bhagavatas by the above circuitous logic!

Dear CLN sir, I have some more basic doubts, being devoid of ஞானக்கண், I am not able to go beyond them.

The story goes that when Vamana turned into Thiruvikrama, he just grew larger and larger. As he grew larger one of his feet covered everything on earth. He raised the other foot and covered all of AkAsa. Now, he wanted the third step, but, if he has already covered all of heaven and earth, would Mahabali be already under his first foot, already crushed to death? Even if we are to assume Mahabali crawled out of the first foot to show his head, would he not be on the lord's first foot, and therefore, for the third step, Thiruvikrama had to step on himself?

Also, as Thirvikrama grew, the foot covering the earth must have spread out, like how an appalam will expand when it is rolled with a rolling pin (this is how the process was explained to me in a pravachanam by a revered SV acharya). Would this not then mean our hoary rishees who had pure and complete knowledge thought the earth was flat?

I agree with the sentiments that some bhaktas have expressed here. If you start questioning, the whole thing will come crumbling down, not a single itihasa or purana can stand this kind of scrutiny. This is why all our forefathers relied on responses like, இப்படியெல்லாம் கேட்டா ஒம்மாச்சி கண்ணகுத்துவார், when questioned. We were dumb and gullible enough to accept it. We were ready to be guided with கண்ணகுத்துவார் logic.

These days, youngsters who dare to think are not ready to accept such silly answers. The problem is not lack of proper guidance, the problem is the fantastic stories themselves. The best thing to do is to treat these stories as nothing more real or relevant than the Greek mythologies.

On second thoughts, there are lot to learn about human nature in Greek mythologies, but our puranas seem to glorify only superstitious ideas.

Cheers!

 

[Visalakshi Ramani]

Vamana begged for three PACES of land and not three foot lengths!

In one PACE, He measured the entire earth!

In another PACE, He measured the entire sky.

There was nothing left to measure with the third pace!

so He planted it on the head of Bali -who was definitely NOT under her

Lord's feet till then!

When a normal 6 footer can measure 2.5 feet in a single pace,

What will be the length of a pace of a Viswaroopan?!

We don't need divya dhrushti to know this!

We only need some power of imagination!

 

[Nacchinarkiniyan]

Nara,

Parimala who is an important character in Ramayana is also known as Meenakshi. Not the wife of Lakshmana.