The Similarities and Difference between Vibhishana and Vikarna
I just realised that their story is almost the same.
But their choice determined their final fate.
In Mahabharata, Vikarna was the younger brother of Duryodhana and one of the 100 Kauravas. He was the only Kaurava who talked against the humiliation and disrobing of his sister-in-law Draupadi in the Kuru Assembly.
However, in the final war, he decided to support the Kauravas stating the fact that he had eaten the food of the Kuru throne and Duryodhana was his king. So abandoning the family and king who had fed him, though they were wrong, would be a sin that even death couldn’t get rid of.
In Ramayana, Vibhishana was the youngest brother of Lanka King Ravana. He spoke against Ravana’s act of abducting Sita Devi, and repeatedly requested him to return her to Lord Rama. Yet Ravana dismissed him each time. He knew Ravana was in the wrong. So after multiple attempts of trying to help Ravana and after being humiliated by him, Vibhishana decided to leave his brother and help Lord Rama in his war to free Sita Devi.
Now Vibhishana too had eaten the food of Ravana’s throne. Ravana was his eldest brother. But, Vibhishana states the fact that if a King breaks dharma, then the bond of loyalty through food is severed. Vibhishana chose dharma over family.
So one prince decided to support his king and family over the righteous side, while the other prince decided to support righteousness over his king and family. One chose loyalty and the other chose justice.
In the end, Vibhishana was made the King of Lanka and was a great ruler. While Vikarna fell on the battlefield as a warrior, fighting in support of his king and family, fully knowing that his family was in the wrong.
These are 2 contrasting stories I found in Mahabharat and Ramayana…
What do you think?