You are here: SriPedia - Oppiliappan - Archives - Dec 2005

Oppiliappan List Archive: Message 00170 Dec 2005

 
Dec 2005 Indexes ( Date | Thread | Author )
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]


From: Jayasree Saranathan <jayasree.saranathan@...> 
Date: Fri Dec 16, 2005  5:50 pm 
Subject: Re: Is she capable - continuation 3 

In Smt. Jayasree's mail I am adding my comments. Dhasan M.G.Vasudevan.

JS is Smt. Jayasree

MGV is myself.

JS: Respected Swamin, My humble pranams to you. Kindly pardon me for making an 
interruption in this wonderful write-up you have been giving from time to time. 
In my opinion some amount of psychological empathy goes into understanding why 
Rama was on meager diet and why Sita thought of His condition as giving her 
both amrutham and poison.

MGV: Thank you, madam, for your mail. Interruptions and comments are always 
welcome from all. That too from such a knowledgeable, serial and serious writer 
in and as JS is 'at once' welcomed. 

'From time to time' - please excuse me for that - for I am in service and have 
official and other commitments. 

Besides some amount of knowledge deficiency is also there, which has to be 
overcome from supplement sources of knowledge. This is done by me in the form 
of a discussion with a colleague, with whom every topic, I write, is discussed 
in detail [particularly on sreemadh raamaayaNam].
 
JS: First of all, the dhukkam that both Rama and Sita were undergoing is 
something unparalleled. Even on reading about it, people like us are not able 
to eat or remain calm. Hey SithE, unaaku inda dhukkamaa?
Hey Raama, unakku kooda dhukkamaa?
We also empathise with Hanuman, "Alas, can I ever get to see Sita?"
We catch Sita's emotions, "Hey SeethE podum podum, innum dhukka-p-paddathE"
We feel like telling, "Hey Hanuman, oru kai paarthudum." 

MGV: these all show the capacity of sage vaalmeeki - the aadhi kavi - the first 
poet - to make the reader - even a casual one like MGV to get fascinated with 
his simple and lucid presentation. Then become a serious one like JS - then to 
get emotionally involved with the characters of the epic. 

JS: But thinking of Raama, I have this complaint against Valmiki. When he went 
into details about all the sufferings, when he went on to say how the vanaras 
celebrated the good news of having found out Sita, why was he with such paucity 
of words to express some goodness felt by Raama on receiving the news?

MGV: the hero if he reacts with high emotion such as happiness when the 
servants are enjoying on account of the hero, in my opinion, then the rasa 
anubhavam of enjoyment of the servants gets diminished. For a good father the 
children's pleasure is his pleasure. 

That is why perhaps vaalmeeki underplayed that aanandham of raama. Also as 
naaradha says, not once but twice, 'raama does not show his emotions so easily 
and highly'. See both slokams in the very first sargam of baala kaaNdam.

ikshvaaku vamsa prabhavO raamO naama janai: srutha: |
niyatha aathmaa mahaaveeryO dhyuthimaan dhruthimaan vasee || 1-1-8
meaning: "One emerged from Ikshvaku dynasty and known to people as Rama by his 
name, and he is conscientious, highly valorous, resplendent, steadfast and a 
controller of vice and vile, and his own senses, as well. 

Dharmajna: sathya sandha: cha prajaanaam cha hithE ratha: |
yasasvee jnaana sampanna: suchi: vasya: samaadhimaan || 1-1-12
meaning: "He is the knower of rectitude, bidden by the truth, also his concern 
is in the welfare of subjects, proficient in prudence, clean in his conduct, 
self-controlled and a diligent one, thus he is glorious.

This word vasee and vasya denotes the controlling of senses. 'Senses' is a 
complete word, and exhibiting aanandham or pleasure is part of that.

JS: There is just the information about goose pimples experienced by Raama and 
Lakshmana on hearing from Shugreeva that there is some good news about Sita. It 
is because of the fact that Rama was not happy except for having found her 
whereabouts. Because the dhukkam was of such high magnitude. The dhukkam was of 
such high magnitude, that Raama, Lakshmana and Sita could not have remained 
calm or caring for their body on those occasions. 

MGV: replied as above.

JS: Then where comes even the thought of using the mantras Bhala and Ati bhala? 
What they needed were sedatives and not mantras for keeping awake or 
appetite-free! And Sita could have never thought of even a sedative (if offered 
as we wish) for who knows what kind of danger would come to her from Ravana, if 
she is asleep or loses her conscious vigilance even for a second. Recall the 
way the kavi describes how she shrank herself physically, when Ravana visited 
her in the late hours of night. And didn't Rama know of this danger to Sita? 
How could he have slept or eaten anything when he was under constant worry 
about Sita and her safety? Anybody undergoing that dhukkam would have been so 
without any aid of bhala or ati bhala. 

MGV: Since thee is no evidence from vaalmeeki whether the manthraas are used or 
not, we cannot conclude that it was not used. Further anybody undergoing a 
suffering would seek some remedy - for certain people by weeping, for certain 
by walking some distance, for certain people changing the place, for certain 
others some meditation etc. May be for raama that came from bala and athibala. 
We must give the benefit of doubt to the beneficiary of the manthra and not 
rule out that since kavi has not expressed that openly.

JS: Also these mantras were taught to Raama and Lakshmana by the sage at a time 
when they were required to keep round the clock vigil over the yajnas that the 
sages in the forest were doing and they as very young princes who have until 
then had grown in the luxuries of princely life would not have got used to 
keeping awake and even going without food for days in their vigil over the 
yajnas. Certainly those mantras would in no way be in the thought of Raama 
while in search of Sita, and whatever he ate was the basic minimum required to 
keep him alive and strong enough, because he had that formidable task of 
looking for Sita and vanquishing the one who had abducted his dear wife. 

MGV: 'whatever given like the bala and athibala are not sufficient. Hey sage 
visvaamithra give more to raama' was the comment of indhra made just after 
raama killed thaataka. So sage also gave all sasthraas and asthraas, later 
paved way for getting seethaa also. Shall we call this also a gift from 
visvaamithra?

When raama has used later all the asthraas, sasthraas and seethaa also - just 
recall seethaa saying for 12 years we enjoyed all materialistic life before 
raama was called upon to be coronated, - is there no chance that he would not 
use these two manthraas.
 
JS: In this context the comparison with "what is great in Bheeshma?" looks out 
of place. 

MGV: it is just a point just came to mind, which I wanted to share with all, 
and definitely not a comparison. If it is interpreted as a comparison then I am 
sorry.

JS: Raama could have as well reached Lanka soon after the abduction, or could 
have reached the parNashala in time to thwart Ranavana's efforts and killed him 
then and there. But He had scripted the sequences in such a way that (it looks 
that) He and Sita deliberately parted and suffered presumably to make room for 
other players such as Shugreeva and Hanuman, other samhaarams such as Vali's 
and establishment of Dharmas such as sharanagathi to Vibheeshana with Piratti 
not being physically present, but by extending purushakaarathwam in absentia 
(via hanuman). This purushakaarathwam of Sita is the interpretation I see for 
the second part of your mail! She is one who is bearing the suffering on behalf 
of all jivas, to drive home the point that come whatever may, bhagavan will not 
leave us in the lurch, that bhagavan is indeed suffering more in His search for 
the jivas He has lost in samsara. - Will she ever think that she is the one who 
is really suffering with no armoury that Rama has? 

MGV: 'purushakaarathwam'- etc are beyond my capacity to grasp and hence I offer 
no point / comment.

JS: Likewise will she ever think that while she is suffering, what is so great 
about Rama not eating or sleeping? She is one takes the sufferings of others 
and suitably recommend to Him that they are indeed eligible for His kataaksham. 
Can such a person ever think that she is suffering more and compare it with 
Raama's? Even if she were to think about Rama's suffering, She would be 
thinking of taking that suffering too for herself. That is the characteristic 
of any Bharateeya naari. That is all the more true for a pati-vrathai. And that 
is Absolute Truth for Piratti! She could not even stand the news of fire in 
Hanuman's tail. She, who did not think of cleaning her body resorted to 
cleaning by athma shuddhi before invoking Agni bhagavan not to burn Hanuman. 
Can such a Sita ever think that it is a monkey statement and that Raama has 
better armoury unlike her, to ward of hunger and sleep? Another dimension to 
this is the supreme Trust between the couple in marriage, here the divine 
couple. They know each other how the other would be in their absence. They 
followed the acharam of each other in the absence of each other. Even if 
Shugreeva has brought food and compelled Raama to eat, what would have Rama 
told, "How can I eat this food when Sita wont be touching anything offered by 
that abductor." Rama's constant bickering, asking even the trees and animals 
whether they had seen Sita is to be seen that He could not think of anyone 
other than Sita. 

MGV: these all are high-class interpretations by JS. Similarly I also 
interpreted that as monkey statement.

JS: But Sita did ask whether He was thinking about her. It was due to the delay 
in Raama reaching to her. Coupled with it were all sorts of self-doubts about 
herself. Such a Sita will be cursing herself or her fate more and more than 
thinking that Rama is in a better position than hers. Even when she was 
thinking that Rama might complete his vana vasam and go back to Ayodhya without 
tracing her, she considered it as her Dhur-bhagyam and not find it as Rama 
being better placed. That is about the way women think.

MGV: again a good defense lawyer's argument in support of her client.

JS: As such it is not a monkey statement. Monkey statement is something else - 
which she says later when Hanuman declared that he can take her to Rama. There 
again Hanuman was initially led to think that it is to do with his physical 
prowess. But after Sita explained the intricacies in it, he realized the 
un-tenability of his declaration or offer. Here it is amrutham visha 
sampruktham.

MGV: since that comes later we cannot place the sentences of kavi to suit our 
argument or convenience. Kavi has placed this amrutham visha sampruktham here.

JS: She receives the news that Raama is always thinking of her. It is amrutham 
for that gives her tremendous strength to brave any kind of suffering. It is 
visham, for he is suffering on account of her. This is unbearable to her, for 
she can never have Rama suffer on any account particularly for her sake. 

MGV: that is what is given in the first interpretation. Second is just a 
different one given with main intention to introduce that such marvelous krithi 
of thyaagaraaja. 

JS: she, who entered agni for his sake and who took up life in exile as a 
pregnant woman for the sake of his honour! There is no such scope here (in the 
context under discussion) for her to do something to thwart his suffering. She 
could have embraced death (which she seriously contemplated) but that would 
bring dishonour to Him. She could have killed Ravana by herself or by power of 
pati vratham. But that would bring dishonour to Him. She could have even 
accepted Hanuman's offer of taking her back to Raama. But that would bring 
dishonour to Him. All options available to her are tied to this dishonour 
aspect to Rama. That is the crux of this entire issue! 

MGV: as seethaa herself stated she did not have the mandate of raama to 
eliminate raavaNa. It means that she is capable all the while but just 
restrains herself for the sake of honour of her husband. That was the highlight 
in the previous 8 [5 + 3] posts on this topic.

Further when raama was about to meet sage sarabhanga indhra was there waiting 
to lead or take the rishi to nether world. Indhra said I do not want to talk to 
raama now and till he finishes his avathaara kaaryam of elimination of such 
evil forces like raavaNa so that it will show to the world who is raama, and 
left the place without talking to raama. Seethaa, and lakshmaNa were also there 
by the side of raama. When indhra sidetracked to meet raama, she would 
definitely, have realized whose responsibility it is to do such kaaryam of 
elimination.  

Dhasan

Vasudevan m.g
 



DISCLAIMER:
  This Message and its contents is intended solely for the addressee and is 
proprietary.Information in this mail is for L&T Business Usage only. Any Use to 
other than the addressee is misuse and infringement to Proprietorship of L&T 
ECC.If you are not the addressee please return the mail to the sender.L&T ECC 
DIVISION




------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing
http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/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