You are here: SriPedia - Oppiliappan - Archives - Nov 2004

Oppiliappan List Archive: Message 00172 Nov 2004

 
Nov 2004 Indexes ( Date | Thread | Author )
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]


SRIMATHE RAMANUJAYA NAMAHA.

Two questions have been raised in the Bow?s story ?10,
to which I wish to attempt some answers and expect and
accept comments / corrections / concurrence from
fellow devotees. I gather some courage to venture into
this - though I am more on the side of being
disqualified for my little knowledge of Shastras and
puranas? purely out of conviction that the aim of our
shastras and sruti is not to reveal anything outright
but to make us to delve,  think,  probe,  discuss and
deduce.

The questions are
(1) In her conversation with Anasuya, sita says that
the shiva-dhanush was obtained by her father Janaka
from Varuna in a maha-yajna. Is this not contrary to
the version found elsewhere, that it was given to the
Videha king, Devaratha? Then which version is right?
(2) If sita as a 6 year old girl could move the heavy
shiva-dhanush effortlessly, why could she not protect
herself when Ravana lifted her up?
To find a convincing reply to the first question, let
us remember that cross-references and interpretations
using similar versions expressed in the same source do
help in arriving at a better understanding.  In my
limited knowledge, let me quote 2 instances of such 
mix-up (perceived so)  in Valmiki Ramayana and how
learned persons  have resolved them. 

One occurs in Sundara khandam when Hanauman was
witnessing Ravana?s outburst against Sita when she
refused to budge. His wife Dhanyamalini pacified him
and brought him back to his palace. Later when Hanuman
recounted this incident to fellow vanaras on his
return, he said that Mandodhari pacified Ravana. This
is not seen as a mix-up nor of  something to doubt the
veracity of the  incident that occurred, but as a
proof that Ravana?s patta-mahishi too was present when
he visited Sita. Both Mandodhari and Dhanyamalini (who
were accompanied with scores of other wives of Ravana)
seemed to have persuaded Ravana to retire to his
place. The mention of one at one sarga and the other
at another sarga, does not negate the presence of both
at the time of incidence.

Another incident is that of Rama telling Sita at the
end of the war (before agni-pravesa) to go to
Lakshmana or Bharatha. This is interpreted by
pandithas, not as being derogatory  (not to mean any
anartham) but only as an advice to  take  refuge in
them for protection, like how a mother is protected by
her sons. Suffice it to say that for umpteen number of
times it has been said in Valmiki ramayana itself that
lakshmana is like her son.  

Based on the interpretations such as these, let us
analyse the first question. That the dhanush was given
 by Rudra to Devaratha is a fact considering that more
than one instance can be cited to substantiate this
(by cross-reference). At the same time let us not
ignore the fact that Sita does not say that Varuna
gave it Devaratha, she merely says that varuna gave it
to her father Janaka (who was the son of Devaratha.)
So something exists in-between, a reference to which
may exist in some other source. But by interpretation
(like how it is done in the 2 instances quoted above),
we may  be permitted to say that it was true that this
bow  was given by Rudra to Devaratha and it was also
true that Varuna gave this to Janaka. It is possible
that it had gone into the hands of janaka by means of
a yajna in which the Varuna-devatha formally transfers
the bow to Janaka.  That is, Janaka comes into
possession of this bow (though by now a family
property) by means of some rituals in which the
devathas pray for the bow (this is what Sita says to
Anasuya) to be given to Janaka and Varuna undertakes
the act of giving it. Thus both the information about
the possession of the bow are to be treated as facts
told by Valmiki. 

Taking up the second question, I wish to look into two
pieces of information drawn from Valmiki Ramayana
itself.
One is that Bhagavath-sankalpam takes place only
during  certain kaala-dEsha- vartha maana. The
Vishnu-veeryam was present in the Shiva-dhanush only
at the time of samhaaram of Thripura asuras (refer
previous postings of bow?s story) and not later when
the war broke out between Vishnu and shiva. Likewise,
shiva placed His veeryam in the dhanush to make it
extremely heavy only when Ravana came to lift it up.
Even otherwise it was heavy ( by some standard) is
another point. Whether it was heavy when Sita as a
little girl moved it is yet another point to ponder.

 The question that comes to my mind here is whether
Ravana recognised Sita, when Surpanaga told him of the
story of Rama and Sita and persuaded him to avenge
them for the humiliation she suffered. Ravana didn?t
betray any remembrance of the incident at Janaka?s
court nor any knowledge about Sita?s existence. He
listened to Surpanaka as though he was hearing about
her for the first time. The reasons are easy to
understand. It was by a kind of selective amnesia that
he would not have wanted to remember Sita?s
swayamvara, where he suffered a humiliation to his
valour (in having failed to lift the bow). That
perhaps was a strong reason mentally,  to wish to take
her to show how valiant he was. Because at every
occasion he was keen on showing her how valiant he was
and he lost no occasion to abuse Rama that was no
match to him . Thus the seeds of doing harm to Rama
must have been sown at Janaka?s court itself. When the
chance came he didn?t want to lose the it - however
otherwise convinced he might be about the pathi-vradha
nature of Sita. Because when he told her that he was
going to take her, he addressed her ?varavarNinI? ? (a
term used to exemplary women who are extremely devoted
to the husband) and ridiculed Rama that he was not a
match even to his finger!!

Our (2nd) question is why Sita didn?t stop the
abduction by some way ? (implied) say by even becoming
heavy so that Ravana would have struggled as he did
when he tried to lift the shiva-dhanush. The reasons I
can think of is the one stated above (based on
kaala-desha-vartha maana) and the stated position of
Sita that she, as pathi-vradahai (shesha here) was not
supposed to act without being ordained by her lord.
Sita at this juncture (at Aranya) was not the same as
the 6 year old at Janaka?s palace and her dharma was
different now. 

But the core reason was stated by Sita herself as she
was being lifted by Ravana. As she was screaming the
name of Rama, she wailed why he, as protector of
dharma,  had not protected her as she was being taken
away in adharmic way ? why he as one who punishes the
sinners had not yet punished Ravana. Then as if by
realisation, she continued that unless one had sinned,
how could he be punished. Ravana had done the
paapa-kaaryam only then (in the process of abduction)
and it would take some time for the counter-action
(for the paapa) to take place, just  as how it takes
some time for the plant to give results.

This is to be read along with what Rama says as his
mission to the sages who visited him in Sarabhanga
ashram (aranya khandam) pleading him to protect them
from the raakshasas. Rama confides to them that he had
undertaken vana- vasam for a personal reason
(sondha-prayOjanam). If they (sages) ask if it is not
due to pitru-vaakhya paripaalanam, Rama says it is not
so. He uses it only as  a pretext to be able to come
to the forest to destroy the asuras. He further states
that he has come there only on his own volition, to
fulfil his purpose. 

When Rama does for a purpose, so also Sita does to
further His cause. The abduction is only  a pretext to
make ravana commit an offence to rama so that Rama can
rise up against him. Sita could have as well stopped
Ravana from lifting her. But that she didn?t  give a
minimum physical resistance nor even a fight when
ravana lifted her, gives a different story. Had she
resisted, Ravana would not have dared to even touch
her. Because such was the curse ravana had on his
life. Valmiki says this precisely when  ravana lifted
her, that mindful of the curse on his life, he held by
her hair in his left hand and her thigh in his right
hand so that  her body does not touch his.  This shows
that sita could have easily made Ravana burst into
pieces, if she had resisted. But that was not the
purpose for which the entire story was enacted. 

A further proof for why Rama needed a pretext to kill
ravana can be cited as follows. We may be permitted to
ask why Rama didn?t kill him instantly in the war. He
first cuts off his heads, which however grew
immediately. I am reminded here of the adage in Tamil
?Dharmam thalai kaakkum? . Ravana was protected by the
numerous good deeds and the penance he had done
earlier. Then how to stop them from coming to his
rescue? I find a clue to this in the abduction drama
that unfolded after jatayu?s exit. Jatayu had fallen
on the ground and Sita sits beside him wailing about
his demise and her bad luck. It is then Ravana lifts
her up by her hair to carry her. Seeing this Brahma
deva remarks, ?kaaryam mudindhadhu? (the job is done)
and the  otherwordly entities too rejoice over this.
Yes, valmiki uses the term rejoice here. Why should
they be rejoiced when Sita were to be treated like
this ? This perhaps forms the pretext or cause for
wiping out whatever dharma that Ravana had accumulated
that would safeguard him even when he is in dire
straits. There may be  connection between this rejoice
over lifting her by her hair and Ravana getting back
his head in position in the war. This act perhaps was
instrumental in getting whatever dharma that was left
to safeguard his head was successively getting
depleted every time that Rama cut off a head and
finally leaving him out of bound for protection by
dharma in his account,  so that the final asthra, the
Brahmasthra was able to  finish his life. 

(PS : The instances / narratives  from Valmiki
ramayana  quoted in this mail are drawn from the
transliteration of the same into Tamil done by Sri
A.V. Narasimhachari published by R. Venkateswarar &
co, in the year 1926.)


- jayasree saranathan 



                
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. 
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/XUWolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Oppiliappan/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    Oppiliappan-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index ] [Thread Index ] [Author Index ]
Home Page
http://www.ibiblio.org/sripedia
oppiliappan-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
To subscribe to the list