You are here: SriPedia - SriRangaSri - Archives - Jun 2003

SriRangaSri List Archive: Message 00019 Jun 2003

 
Jun 2003 Indexes ( Date | Thread | Author )
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]


Shrimate ranga ramanuja maha deshikaya namaha
I joined up for the srirangasri groups at first hoping for discussions on pure 
bhakthi. I just want to say that a couple of e-mails really disturbed me. First 
was the whole string of mails back and forth on "Shuklambaram Vishnum". And now 
this mail on "Sita's sins, big and small."
I do not have the deep wisdom that I have had the opportunity to observe 
reading these articles. I must admit that I do not understand many of them that 
are of a high intellectual nature. But I think that the whole nature of 
Sharanagati to the Lord is based on utter and unshakeable devotion. Therefore I 
am, I admit, offended by the heading..."Sita's Sins, big and small." I do feel 
that all this is a part of the Lord's great celestial play. "Sita's sins"...to 
presume this is in itself a sin.




sadagopaniyengar <sadagopaniyengar@xxxx> wrote:

Srimate SrivanSatakopa Sri Vedanta Desika Yatindra Mahadesikaya nama:



Sita's Sins, Big and Small


We endeavour our best to tread the path of virtue and righteousness. We 
consciously shun all wrong-doing and strive hard to tread the narrow and 
straight path of Dharma. We prompt ourselves to perform meritorious deeds at 
every available opportunity. In short, we make every effort to espouse good 
conduct and eschew all others.



However, the faculties we are endowed with often pull us in directions in which 
we may not be willing to travel. The Five Indriyas every person is bestowed 
with form both friend and foe. When they lead us in the right direction, there 
can be no better friends than they. However, many a time, the eye insists on 
seeing forbidden sights, the ears revel in hearing gossip, the mind fills 
itself with the most unwanted of thoughts and last, but not the least, the 
tongue gets us most into trouble, saying unwanted things which, true or false, 
better remain unsaid. While the reasons for such indiscretions with the 
indiriyas are manifold, the principal ones are KAma, KrOdha, MOha, LObha,Mata 
and MAtsarya, the six eternal enemies which push us into wrong-doing, 
willy-nilly. And almost everybody, with rare exceptions, appear to fall into 
the treacherous trap laid by these faulty faculties. If it is any consolation 
for us, even Sita Piratti, acclaimed to be the epitome of womanly virtue 
("nAreeNAm utttamA vadhoo") appears to have fallen prey to this failing and 
given play to Her tongue in a hurting manner, which later brought on grievous 
consequences. She appears to have indulged in speech more cruel than the biting 
winter wind and caused hurt more grievous than any weapon of war. Though such 
conduct is totally out of character for the Divine Consort, it is perhaps 
intended to teach us lessons (as every event in Srimad Ramayana does) in 
continence and tolerance. The beauty of the great Epic lies in its portraying 
right conduct not only through the positive actions of its divine characters, 
but also through underlining the disastrous effects of their minor misdeeds, 
intended or otherwise.



It must be said, to the defence of Piratti, that anyone in Her place and 
circumstances would have reacted perhaps with greater vehemence in word and 
deed, even if he or she had been an absolute paragon of temperance and 
restraint. Her conduct was thus very excusable and was occasioned by great 
provocation: yet, by Her own admission and by Her lofty standards, it was 
unforgivable conduct for which She duly reaped the bitter fruit. And 
retribution for the wrongs was swift and prompt, making Her suffer what no 
other woman would. The torment that Sri Mythily underwent in the Asoka vanam, 
surrounded by terrifying rAkshasIs who pulled no punches in trying to browbeat 
Her into being Ravana's mistress, the asurA's own frequent appearances and 
words steeped in venom, the prolonged separation from Her beloved Raghava whom 
She had vowed not to be apart from even for a second, the killing suspense as 
to what had happened to the brothers Rama after they went one after the other 
in pursuit of the golden deer, the remorse that was eating Her away, for having 
succumbed to the charms of the impossibly beautiful animal and desired its 
acquisition at any cost, the apparent absence of any light or an end to the 
long and dark tunnel of suffering that seemingly stretched away interminably, 
the slim possibility and prospects of escaping from the asurA's fortress to 
liberty and reunion with Her beloved, the great dilemma as to whether it was 
better to end Her life rather than undergo the insufferable ordeal or to live 
on in the hope of Sri Rama mounting a rescue effort (however improbable it 
sounded)- these and a hundred other agonies distressed the Divine Consort, 
prompting Her to rue time and again having uttered those words of insult, which 
were obviously the root cause of all that was happening now.



When we are in the grip of terrible torment, it is usual for us to blame others 
for our problems. We tend to look for a convenient scapegoat, on whom could be 
nailed the cross for our distress. We are so very sure our own guiltlessness 
that we invariably dismiss possibilities of the troubles being self-inflicted. 
We never wonder as to what could be behind the suffering and sorrow, what we 
might have possibly said or done, which could have led to the present 
predicament. It is a hallmark of Piratt's humility and honesty that She 
indulges not in the blame game, but in self-analysis, trying to fathom the 
reasons for the cruel blow dealt by fate on Her unsuspecting self.

And, after much rumination, She comes up with the offences for which She was 
probably being penalised now. She feels sure that it must be those misdemenours 
which must have occasioned all the suffering-



"mama Eva dushkritam kinchit mahat asti na samsaya:

samartthou api yat mAm na avEkshEtE parantapou"



Piratti feels that it is impossible for Sri Raghava not to know of Her anguish 
and agony. And once He decides to destroy Ravana and rescue Her, none can 
indeed stand in His way. He is capable, as is Lakshmana, of destroying enemies 
like mere flies. Given all this, Her continued suffering must indeed be due to 
Her own fate, Her own intransigences and transgressions, big and small, which 
had resulted in Her being apparently ignored by the brothers Rama. There was 
absolutely no doubt about this, for it was otherwise inexplicable. When the man 
was willing, capable and had adopted as His life's mission the protection of 
the oppressed, what else could be the reason behind such indifference to Her 
travails?



Sri Mythily speaks of sins (dushkritam), small (kinchit) and big (mahat), which 
She must have committed, to merit such misery. Though She doesn't indicate what 
could these offences be, our Poorvacharyas have delved deep into the Epic and 
brought out with difficulty two possible occasions of inappropriate speech on 
the part of Piratti.



While leaving for His fourteen-year exile in the woods, Sri Rama categorically 
declines to take Sita along, pointing out the innumerable terrors and travails 
the jungle holds for the delicate Princess, who had known nothing but luxury 
since birth. He argues convincingly (but not convincingly enough for His wife), 
that Her place is at Ayodhya, looking after the aged in-laws. Driven by Her 
boundless love for the Prince of Ayodhya and by the desire to be with Him 
always, in pleasure or in pain, in comfort or in distress, in regal splendour 
or in a penniless state, motivated solely by Her repugnance for an existence, 
however luxurious, apart from Her caring Consort, Sri Mythily argues vehemently 
with Sri Rama, repudiating each and every one of His seasoned arguments in 
favour of Her staying back at Ayodhya. When even the ultimate arsenal of women, 
copious tears, fails to move the Prince, in Her anxiety to avoid separation 
from Her beloved, Piratti uses a few words which constiute the ultimate insult 
to any man, that of doubting His masculinity and prowess. When Rama refuses 
steadfastly to take Her along, Sita tells Him in anger and despair that it was 
indeed a pity that Her father should have married Her off to a woman in a man's 
garb, for, the reluctance to have Her accompany Him to the jungle and to 
protect Her from all that might happen en route, signified the existence of an 
yellow streak in Rama, which was the hallmark not of the scion of the famed 
IkshvAku dynasty, but that of a cowardly woman. Here are the hurting words of 
Mythily, uttered in anger and haste and repented at distressful leisure-



"kim tvA manyata VaidEha: pita mE MithilAdhipa:

Rama jAmAtaram prApya striyam purusha vigraham"



Some may feel, how could Sita have uttered such words to Rama, who was the 
personification of bravery, virility and matchless prowess, as demonstrated at 
the very first encounter with Sita, through the masterful handling of the Shiva 
dhanus? And are these not words behoving a much lesser mortal than Piratti, 
acclaimed as the embodiment of all possible virtue? The Pativrata that She was, 
how was it possible for Her to have spoken such harsh words as would be deeply 
hurtful to even the most ordinary of mortals and more so to Raghunandana?



Sri Valmiki justifies Sita's conduct by trotting out the excuse that it was 
prompted not by a desire to insult or to get the better of the spouse in a 
verbal skirmish, or even as a matter of egoistic eccentricity. "praNayAt Eva 
samkruddhA" says the Maharshi, confirming that Sita's speech of anger and 
anguish was born solely from overwhelming love and boundless affection, making 
it impossible for Janakanandini to think of an existence bereft of Rama. 
Shastras permit the usage of four strategies for achievement of any goal-SAmam, 
bhEdam, dAnam and dandam-the last one, force or coercive action, to be 
undertaken when all else fails. It was this strategy that Sita adopted in 
calling Him a woman, having failed to impress Raghava with all Her forceful, 
impassioned and well-reasoned out arguments. 



Acharyas aver that it is these barbs of hurt hurled at Her spouse that Sri 
Mythily means, when She talks of "dushkritam kinchit"-some minor misdemeanour. 
One is surprised-if uttering the ultimate unsult, that of casting aspersions on 
the husband's masculinity, that too of no less a person than the Paramapurusha, 
is to be termed a minor misdemeanour, what indeed could be the major one?



-to be continued-



Srimate Sri LakshmINrsimha divya paduka sevaka SrivanSatakopa Sri Narayana 
Yatindra Mahadesikaya nama:

Dasan, sadagopan



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Srirangasri-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





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