Subject: Re: Bow's story ? clarification on question raised.
Dear sri vaishNava perunthagaiyeer,
Continuing the points on Smt. Jayasree's mail on the bow's story,
this is part 2. as stated earlier JASN is Smt. Jayasree and my points
are given as MGV: --
JASN: 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.
MGV: -- One point here. The original when it was intended for the
dhEvaas may have been light but once the bow reached human hands like
dhEvaraatha, chances are very bright that the bow became heavy.
Please compare human time and dhEvaas time. One ayanam [6 months
period] for us is half a day for them. Like that the weight alsocan
be. To put it lightly ? what is one quintal for us [100kgs] may be
one gram for them. Further once built, the heaviness with which it
was built will not go elsewhere. That is why it is so light for them
but heavy for human kings here. But since seethaa is `saakshaath maha
lakshmee' it was very light for her.
JASN: The question that comes to my mind here is whether Ravana
recognised Sita, when Surpanaka 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).
MGV: This is ok. Also since soorpanakaa was the sufferer she has to
be heard properly by her elder brother, whom she thinks mighty and
can help her in achieving her goals [either by way of punishing the
human characters who defaced her, or by way of bringing forcefully
the humans whom she liked and give to her for enjoyment or in
marriage ]. At that stage he would definitely not like to exhibit he
also suffered at the cause of same seethaa.
JASN: 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.
MGV: To a large extent, yes.
JASN: When the chance came he didn't want to lose it - however
otherwise convinced he might be about the pathivratha 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!!
MGV: bhoothir vaa thvam varaarOhE rathir vaa svaira chaariNee || 3-46-
17
Actually the addressing is `varaarOhE', and the attribute of the
addressee is a beautiful woman. This `varaarOhE' is one among the
group of:
varaarOhaa,
mathtta kaasinee,
uththamaa,
vara varNinee
- amara kosam ? 2-4-436 [chapter 2].
Again this addressing is repeated
vasoonaam vaa varaarOhE dhevathaa prathibhaasi mE |
na iha gachChanthi gandharvaa na dhEvaa na cha kinnaraa: || 3-46-28
JASN: 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-
vrathai (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.
MGV: The point here is ? when, as a six year old, she could push the
siva dhanu: so easily, her mind always was on raama [as mahalakshmi
thinking of naaraayaNan, in and as raama] so she could do that. But,
now, in front of raavaNan, she has become a part of raama having
united with him in marriage as well physically also. For she claims
in front of that very same raavaNan, " we enjoyed the humanly life
for 12 years in ayodhyaa as well in forest". So now she is totally
dependent on raamaa. So her powers are identified with raamaa.
Further as stated in slokam 2-29-6 [given below again] seethaa, when
raavaNan is approaching her, with the intention of abducting, is not
in the vicinity of raama. For she only sent him away. As such, she
has become powerless. Further, at least if lakshmaNa is there she
could have had some power. Even he is sent away. As such raavaNan
could lift her so easily.
[like the modern day quiz programmes, the clue is given by way of the
following slokam, in the write up [earlier], before the question
or doubt is raised].
Further as stated by herself, somebody comparatively more powerful
than indhran also could do no harm when raama is in her vicinity.
[Actually raavaNan has overpowered indhran already. That is why all
gods lead by indhran went to brahma and, he, in turn, went to
naaraayanan, as we have seen in vaali vadham series by Sri
Anjaneyalu ? on the portion dealing with birth of vaali ? sargam 16
of baala kaaNdam].
na cha maam thvath sameepastham api saknOthi raaghava |
suraaNaam eeshvara: sacra: pradharsayithum Ojasaa || 2-29-6
Meaning: Oh raama! Even dhEvendhra, the lord of celestials, by his
strength, cannot over power me, when I am in your vicinity.
Moreover when seethaa is fully conscious of herself, she would have
done the act of just resisting the abductor. But her mind was fully
on the golden deer. As long as her mind was on `materialistic things'
like golden deer, she could not do that thing, even to protect
herself, though she is so powerful as to push the siva dhanu.
[at the stage of pushing the dhanu, she is awaiting the lord's
arrival, always thinking of him and the time of his arrival, the
union with her lord etc, even though apparently she is playing with
ball etc].
Even if her mind was on raamaa, raavaNan could not have overpowered
her.
thatha: suvEsham mrugayaa gatham pathim
pratheekshamaaNaa saha lakshmaNam thadhaa |
nireekshamaaNaa haritham dhadharsa thath
mahad vanam na Eva thu raama lakshmaNou || 3-46-38
Meaning: Then she looked forward for her finely attired husband, who
has gone on a hunting game, and also for Lakshmana, but on her
gazing, she saw the greenery of the great forest only, but not Rama
or Lakshmana.
[hari also mean a deer. Here the `looking forward' for raamaa is with
the intention of `hey, when he returns he will bring that beautiful
deer, but here is a braahmaNan waiting, may be I have to do `athithi
sathkaaram' with full involvement, or, he has to be sent out soon.
This person will be an intrusion, when raamaa comes back, he will
bring the golden deer, live or dead. So she was in two minds ? one on
raamaa with deer, deer being predominant - another on the braahmaNan
waiting]. Thus the powers inherent have all gone or not helping her
because of the mind is engaged elsewhere.
Once she is abducted, overpowered and carried away, all her
concentration returned on raamaa. That is why no body could do any
harm to her. All threats from raakshasees, raavaNan etc were only
words, and she has to react to that superficially.
JASN: But Sita herself stated the core reason as Ravana was lifting
her. 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.
MGV: The protector of dharmam is her lord raamaa, who has been sent
away by her. If dharma raajan, the yaman is to be considered here, as
protector of dharmam, then he is a subdued person by the very same
raavaNan. So both could not come to rescue of seethaa.
JASN: 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 fulfill
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.
MGV: Fully agreed.
JASN: 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.
MGV: Yes. Agreed.Otherwise how the avathaara kaaryam will take place.
JASN: 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.
MGV: Agreed.
JASN: 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 1st 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.
MGV: this is the second time. First seethaa is lifted from her
aasraamam. May be the first act can be forgiven. Any act, if done
second time also, then it requires a punishment. So raavaNan deserved
a punishment.
JASN: Seeing this Brahma deva remarks, 'kaaryam mudindhadhu" (the job
is done) and the other worldly 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
MGV: On the whole a very good account and nice interpretations.
Dhaasan Vasudevan m.g.
------------------------ 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/VkWolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SriRangaSri/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
SriRangaSri-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
Home Page
http://www.ibiblio.org/sripedia |
srirangasri-subscribe@yahoogroups.com To subscribe to the list |