Next >

Sri Swamigal has been rendering ‘Upanyãsam’ (discourses), in Tamizh, in Premika Bhavanam. This is being brought to you here.

There may appear to be variations in the ‘tense’ of the language. This is due to the fact that great effort has been taken to maintain the original style of the ‘Upanyãsam’. Therefore, we request you to keep this in mind while reading the translated ‘words’ of Sri Swamigal.

Sri Swamigal,

"HARE RÃMA HARE RÃMA RÃMA RÃMA HARE HARE
HARE KRISHNA HARE KRISHNA KRISHNA KRISHNA HARE HARE"

" Bhagavãn, has taken several ‘Avatãrs’ (incarnations) in order to uplift the ‘samsãriis’ (the worldly) as also to establish Dharma (Righteousness). ‘Paritrãnãya Sadhunãm vinãshãya chadushkritãm’ (Lord Krishna in the Gita) means in the effort to establish dharma it is not enough to just protect the Sadhus but also remove all the hurdles (‘prathikoolas’) in the way of the Sadhus who strive to stand in the path of Dharma. Hence, ‘vinãshãya chadushkritãm’, i.e. Bhagavãn incarnates to destroy the wicked (‘dushtãs’). ‘Sambavãmi yuge yuge’ - This does not mean that Bhagavãn takes an avatara in each Yuga, i.e. One in Kali Yuga, one in Treta Yuga, one in Krita Yuga. Instead, whenever Dharma faces deep danger (hurled down by wickedness) then Bhagavãn takes ‘avatãr’. This is seen from History.

Bhagavãn is never tired of taking ‘avatãrs’. Bhagavãn does not feel disheartened when the purpose of His various ‘avatãrs’ to lift the people is not fulfilled. Bhagavãn shows untiring endeavor in uplifting the ‘samsariis’, in His desire to remove our ignorance. Therefore, Bhagavãn takes Matsya, Koorma, Varãha, Nrisimha avatãrs. But sensing that these ‘avatãrs’ have not been enough, Bhagavãn takes ‘nara-avatãr’ (human incarnation) and that is Rama-avatãr.

What was the need for Rama-avatãr? - A poet (‘kavi’) says, “There are three things that do not satiate a person so easily. One desires to see them over and over again. One does not tire of watching them. What are these? First is the Ocean, second the Moon and third the Elephant! We are never tired of watching these three.

Never do we think that the Moon has been in existence ‘Yuga’ after ‘Yuga’ (since time immemorial) and what is new in it to be enjoyed. The Full Moon (‘Poornima’) is so lovely to look at. The rays of the moon have the power to cool/calm the mind (‘ranjanam’). The rays of the moon remove the anguish (‘tãbam’) caused by the severe heat of the Sun as also that caused by the mind. So the rays of the Moon are cool.

Similarly, the amazing trunk of the elephant, the swaying of its ears never tires one. From a child to an old man all are amused by the elephant and watch it with glee.

Likewise, the ocean also fascinates everyone. When we sit on its shore and watch we find wave after wave hitting the shore. Never does one feel, “What is so fascinating about this? It is just a continuous flow of waves and nothing else.” We never get tired of watching the waves. But when we look at the ocean we are neither able to measure its size nor fathom its depth nor count objects contained within.

Likewise, Bhagavãn is unfathomable. The immensity of Bhagavãn is beyond our grasp (‘ãzham kãnna mudiyãdhavan’). Sukachãrya, son of Sage Vyãsa, is a Mahãn unparalleled. Vedas, Brahmasutra, Upanishads, Mahabharata, Bhãgavatam have all come from none other than Sage Vyãsa. Sage Vyãsa is the cause of all that are said to be the roots - the very foundation - of Sanatana Dharma. This Sage Vyãsa, through His grace and Teachings, gave everything to his son Sukachãrya. But that Sukachãrya says in the Bhãgavatam, “Yatãdhîtam Yatãmati” -- “Do not think that I have spoken the entire glory of the Lord. Whatever the Guru has taught me, whatever I have grasped, whatever is in my memory, whatever Bhagavãn has blessed me with, whatever Bhagavãn makes me speak, it is these that have been spoken by me!” None can find fault with Sukachãrya in having omitted to speak of a particular ‘guna’ (attribute) of the Lord in the Bhãgavatam. Valmiki might have spoken this particular ‘guna’ of the Lord in Ramayana or it may be found in Vishnu purana. Each one (Mahãtama) speaks of the various ‘gunas’ of the Lord.

Adi Sankara speaks of ‘advaita’ philosophy while Ramanuja speaks of ‘visishtadwaita’ and Madhwãchãrya speaks of ‘dwaita’ philosophy, in describing Bhagavãn. And everyone speaks of all these three - Adi Sankara, Ramanuja and Madhwãchãrya - as great Mahãns! If all three were Mahãns then should not all of them hold the same opinion? But, one speaks of ‘advaita’, one of ‘visishtadwaita’ and one of ‘dwaita’. This only goes to show that Bhagavãn is beyond the description of even such great Mahãns.

One who enters the ocean and returns with a conch declares that the ocean contains conchs. One who returns with pearl opines that the ocean holds pearls. One who finds shells declares that the ocean contains shells. But the fact is that the ocean contains conchs, pearls and also shells as well as many other things. It does not in any way go to prove that the ocean holds only these. The ocean has in its fold innumerable objects. Similarly, none can declare vehemently that Bhagavãn is one with such and such ‘gunas’ only. The Lord’s ‘guna’ is vast (‘anantha kalyãna guna’). The Lord is such a glorious Sriya:pati, Parameswara, Swamy! Such glorious Lord, realizing that His incarnation as Matsya, Koorma, Varãha did not fulfill the purpose, desires to incarnate as a man and takes Rama-avatãr.

Valmiki, while speaking of the majesty of Rama, in Ramayana, describes, “ He was Majestic like the ocean! He was akin to the Himalayas in His valor and fearlessness.” He was Majestic like the ocean. The ocean is very imposing. The very sight of the Ocean is cooling (to the mind and heart) and also does not tire one of seeing it any number of timess for any length. Similarly, Rama who stands with ‘Kothandam’ (bow) is imposing and stately. He appears very Majestic- ‘akhilãnda koti brahmãnda nãyaka’ - Valmiki describes Rama as seen in Sabari’s home - “ãjãnu bãhu”! He possesses strong arms and powerful shoulders. The Swamy (Sri Rama) is, as should a Yuva-Raja (a Prince) be. Sri Rama is found to destroy Asuras one after another during Yajna ‘samrakshana’ ( protection of Yagnas) and in Dandakãranya. He appears to be hard-hearted while destroying the Asuras. But was Rama really hard-hearted? No! One cannot take one’s eyes off Him. He is so very compassionate. If one sees the ‘swaroopa (form) of Sri Rama it seems to be daunting. It is imposing. But the heart (‘hrudaya’) is filled with kindness. Rama-avatãr is such a marvelous ‘avatãr’! In Ramayana, the Swamy is going to exhibit these. On the one side He is filled with ‘Kãtinyam’ (daunting) while on the other with ‘Kãrunyam’ (compassion). Thus, Rama-avatãr is one holding the two on equal scales.

In Rama-avatãr, Bhagavãn was going to incarnate Himself as a man (‘manushya’). Well! What is the foremost (‘pradãnyam’) requirement of a man? It is ‘Guna’ (character). The power of a Mahatma in attracting people through His holiness/divinity is a special matter altogether. Shirdi Sai Baba, our Yogiramsuratkumar, Dattatreya swami are Mahatmãs whose observance of religious regulations (‘ãchãra anushtãnams’) and behaviour are beyond our understanding. They do not bathe; some of them even smoke ‘hookah’; they may not exercise any kind of reservation in the type of food to be consumed or the place to live. They behave as they like. At times they may even appear to be hot-tempered. We just should not try to reason out their behaviour. If we do, we will not be successful. We will not be able to understand it. When we fix a reason for any action of Mahãns it amounts to only our imagination and nothing more. No one can understand the reason (‘kãrana kãryam’) for the activities of Mahãns. We may wonder why such as these who seem to be ill-tempered, drink ‘hookah’ are deemed to be Mahãns. Well! We do not understand their inner ‘hrudaya’ (heart). What is visible to our eyes is only their outward appearance and actions. But beyond all these we find something more in them. And what is it? Compassion! Along with compassion they possess the full flow of divinity (‘Deiva prabhãvam’) in them! We find a powerful force (‘amãnushatvam’) in them. This compassion (‘kãrunyam’) is selfless (without ‘swãrtham’); the compassion that seeks no return. The compassion that just pours out without any restriction whatsoever! It is only because of this we realize their divinity. We understand that their outward behaviour that seems to be disorderly is nothing but a drama played which does not affect them in any way.

In this case, however, Rama comes down to the world as a man; to establish Dharma. Now, How can one man attract another? By his virtues (‘gunas’). Without proper ‘character’ a man cannot attract another. So, the reason for affection felt towards someone is the ‘guna’ in that person. It is only towards the virtuous (‘gunavãn’) that affection is felt. Otherwise it is only aversion that is experienced. Now what is the perfect condition to know the ‘guna’ of a man? He should be in deep sorrow. He must experience some deep sorrow. He is a ‘gunavãn’ indeed whose mind (‘chitta’) remains unchanged even while experiencing some grief. Only such a person is a ‘gunavãn’. At happier times for one to speak of standing by Truth, standing in Dharma is easy. For example, suppose we are to gain something, say, our father has written a will bequeathing some property to us. If in this case someone tries to usurp what rightly belongs to us we may advise him to stand by Truth, stand by Dharma. We cannot then be called a Satyasanta or Dharmãtma because in this case we stand to gain. But a dharmãtma is one who speaks of dharma even if he stands to lose. All speak of dharma when they stand to gain. This is easy. So, a ‘gunavãn’ is known only in an adverse situation. Suppose a situation arises testing the temper of a person. He, however, remains cool. He is calm and composed (‘shanti’). Even in grief a person is balanced. Then and then only is he a ‘gunavãn’. When can one know the virtue (‘guna prabhavam’) in a person? A person’s ‘chãritram’ (virtue) is exhibited when he remains unaffected even at times of trials and tribulations . So, one should see how the person’s reaction is even under hostile conditions.

In Rama-avatãr, since Bhagavãn’s ‘gunas’ were going to be sung, the Lord takes on a lot of hardships. This ‘charitra’ was going to be built on miseries. How does Rama behave in such miserable conditions? The Kingdom is about to slip away from his hands. What does Rama speak in such a situation whence he has to face a great loss? Under such unhappy circumstances He speaks that one should stand by Dharma and Truth. But at the same time He weeps like a man to Lakshmana, “Oh! Lakshmana! I have lost my Kingdom! See, what our father has done to me!” Lakshmana retorts, “Oh! Brother! Come what may! Take over the throne that is rightfully yours!” Rama, however, questions, “What is the purpose of wearing the crown? What is the first duty of the King? To help everyone stand in dharma! To help the citizens stand in their own dharma is the first duty of the King. That is ‘Raja needhi/Raja dharma’. So, if the King were to occupy the throne ignoring dharma and truth how could he advise the citizens to stand in dharma or Truth? His occupying the throne itself has been ‘adharma’. Having earned ‘adharma’ how then can the king speak or help dharma or truthfulness in the Kingdom? It is not possible for the King to adhere to Dharma or Truthfulness when he has forcefully occupied the throne that had been refused to him. It will be sheer mockery of Dharma if a minister who is a trickster himself preaches others not to cheat. Therefore, one should stand in ‘Satya’ (Truth) and ‘Dharma’ (Righteousness). So, here Rama says, “I will not occupy the throne ignoring Satya and Dharma. How can I rule the Kingdom if I give up Satya and Dharma? The throne is meant only to install Satya and Dharma!” Thus, Rama speaks of and stands in Satya and Dharma even while he himself faces a great loss. Such excellent character (‘parãkãshtamãna azhagu’) is depicted in Rama-avatãr. Therefore, in this Avatãr it is the ‘gunas’ that are taken up. When one possesses excellent ‘gunas’ we feel drawn to him. But, when he does not possess ‘gunas’ we feel repulsive. However, even if a person possesses excellent ‘gunas’ (‘uthamamãna gunas’) one requires maturity of mind to appreciate this. One who is selfish (‘swartham’), one who cannot think of anyone or anything other than himself can neither appreciate virtues (‘gunas’) nor understand vices (‘avagunas’). It is only the one who can understand and enjoy ‘gunas’ who can and will appreciate it and also detect vice.

The Lord was going to exhibit virtues in this Avatãr as Rama. Hence, He comes down as a ‘gunaseela’ (person of noble character). No man (‘naran’) is bereft of faults. A ‘Manushya’ (Man) is liable to commit wrongs. No man is perfect. In his enthralling poem, in Sanskrit, a poet says, ‘It is impossible indeed to see a perfect man in this world who is bereft of even a single fault’. As the poet enumerates this in poetic style, he writes, “ knowledge contained in a Text/book and wealth in another’s possession is of no benefit to us!”

We enquire of someone, “Where is Vidya (knowledge)?” and the reply given is, “In the Text!” Of what use is this explanation? Of what use is the knowledge held in a Text? Similarly, of what use is that money that we are in dire need of but is in possession of our neighbour! The poet goes on to say that one cannot find a perfect man (‘guna poornan’) in this world.

When our ‘chit’ (mind) is impure we should feel hesitant and frightened to stand in Bhagavãn’s Sannidhi. We should experience fear when we go to the sannidhi of Bhagavãn, “Filled with so much faults I have dared to stand in the sannidhi of Bhagavãn. I have dared to touch the Lord with the very hands that have committed innumerable wrongs.” Thus, we should feel guilty of touching the Lord. We should thus feel guilty to go to the presence of Mahãtmãs/Sadhus. In Rama-avatãr, how does Rama stand in the Sannidhi of great Sages such as Valmiki, Vasishta or Vishwamitra or in the Sannidhi of Sri Ranganatha? He stands Majestically. Lord Ranganatha feels intimidated by Rama’s presence! God Himself fears Rama, “A man of such great Truth and Dharma. Can such a man really exist?” An Avatãr which creates awe even in Bhagavãn! In spite of hurdles at every step of life Rama always wears a pleasant face (‘prasanna mukha’) and his bearing is Majestic. Rama does not despair; shows no sign of restlessness of mind (‘chanchala’). When one does ‘pãrãyana’ of Ramayana he finds the mutual sacrifice between Rama and others - the sacrifices made by Lakshmana, Sita, Hanuman for the sake of Bhagavãn and the sacrifices of Bhagavãn for their sake. He is then possessed with a deep desire, “Am I not a Rama bhakta? Should I then not possess at least a few of the qualities of Rama?” So he decides to be like Rama. In what way can he be like Rama? Rama was loyal to his wife (‘eka patni vrathan’). Hence the devotee decides to follow Rama’s footsteps.. Rama never forgets even a small help extended by someone. Rama would always feel indebted to that person. So this devotee decides to inculcate this quality of Rama, too. Thus, repeatedly thinking of and inculcating the various qualities of Rama he gradually transforms himself. Even if he were to acquire just ten percent of the qualities of Rama, the world looks upon him as a Mahãtma! It will suffice even to possess just ten percent of the qualities of Rama. Such a person stands to be looked upon as a Mahãtma by the whole world. A man sees Maha Periyava who lives true to the laid down regulations of the Sanatana dharma. Impressed by this he tries to follow Maha Periyava’s footsteps. But, unfortunately he is unable to lead that sort of a strict disciplined life. He, therefore, goes to Maha Periyava’s presence and falls at His Feet with the deep feeling, “Even in today’s world there is someone who strictly adheres to the Scriptural injunctions!” In the same way one is attracted by Rama’s Dharma and Satya but realizing his own inability to live like Him, decides to falls at His (Rama’s) feet in an act of surrender (‘prapatti’). It is this thought and act that is called Bhakti (devotion). And once a person surrenders unto Rama in no time will he become one himself, by the grace of Rama!

If one holds Rama as his idol (‘adarsha purusha’) and constantly yearns to become like him, it will without any doubt instill all the qualities of Rama in him and transform him into one. Or if we feel that it is impossible for us to earn all the qualities of the great Rama and decide to fall at His feet, it will suffice. By our act of surrender to Rama we will gradually be transformed and become like Him!

In Ramayana, the various qualities of Rama are spoken of at first; these are later highlighted at every step where each of these qualities is exhibited. Rama is a Dharmãtama. Here, dharma does not mean charity. When one speaks of Rama as Dharmãtma it does not mean he performed charity. Dharma is different from dhãna. Rama adhered to every syllable of the rules and regulations the Scriptures lay down for a Kshatriya, including the Vaideehic dharma. If the Scriptures lay down that a Kshatriya has to peform ‘agni hotra’, Yaga Yajna, Rama performed even these without fail. He also ruled the Kingdom as laid down by the Scripture. He stood by the dharma laid down for a Kshatriya. Rama ignored not an iota of it. Rama is the line drawn to show the extent of qualities (‘gunas’) in a man. Rama is the ocean (‘sagara’) of Gunas. Citing a particular ‘guna’, if a devotee of Rama were to be questioned whether Rama possessed it he can very boldly reply, “Yes!’ for, Rama possessed all the virtues. We find all the qualities in Ramayana. Rama was such a (complete/perfect) man of all virtues (‘guna poorna’).

Why did the Lord incarnate in this manner in Rama-avatãr? What is the ‘tãtparya’ (meaning/purpose) of this avatãr? In Rama-avatãr the Lord incarnated Himself only to establish Dharma. Through this epic Ramayana, Valmiki illustrates all the dharma to us. What is the reason for this? We never were during Rama-avatãr. Neither were we during Krishna avatar. So, Rama or Krishna will not appear to be a reality to us. Nor are we able to see with these physical eyes (‘stula netra’) Devatas such as Agni, Vayu, etc. Out of sheer compassion for us, Sages like Valmiki, Sukãchãrya have depicted the lives and lilas of the Lord as Rama and Krishna through ‘Grantas’ (Texts) such as Ramayana, Srimad Bhãgavatam, respectively. While speaking on the life of Rama in Srimad Bhãgavatam, Sukãchãrya says, “It is an avatãr that remains unparalled - there is neither anyone greater than Rama nor equal to Rama in His status!” If Sukãchãrya, an ardent devotee of Lord Krishna says so in Srimad Bhãgavatam one can understand the greatness, the magnitude of Rama-avatãr. Sri Thiagaraja Swami sings in his kirtan, “Sukanuthãya deenabandhave!” Why does Thiagarja Swami sing as ‘Sukanuthãya deenabandhave’ instead of Valmikinuthãya deenabandhave?” Is it not Valimiki who has written the Ramayana? The praise of Rama by Sukãchãrya, an ardent devotee of Lord Krishna, deepens His glory. Hence, Sri Thiagaraja swami sings, “Sukanuthãya deenabandave” “Sukamuni stutipãtra” - one who is sung by Suka. Such a noble Avatãr is this Rama-avatãr.

The Vedas contain ‘apourusha vishayas’ (matters beyond the comprehension of the limited mind). There is no end to the glory of the Vedas. The Vedas has no Text but has been taught verbally (word of mouth) down the generations till date. The ‘shabdam’ (sound) of the Vedas still exist in this ‘prapancha’ (universe). The cosmic around is unclean. By unclean it is not the unhygienic smoke that is meant. All our thoughts fill and affect the space around and above. And our thoughts are not pure. But as we move high up, the space becomes pure, as there are no thought waves of man filling it up. Here, in this space, that is free of thought waves, is the sound of the Vedas. One whose mind has been destroyed, one who is bereft of thoughts becomes a Yogeeswara. Such Yogis grasped the sound of the Vedas and passed it on to humanity.

One may question, “What do the Vedas contain?” Such a question is totally absurd for the mere reason that the Vedas contain everything - be it worldly or spiritual matter. One should understand this. It is not in everyone one to comprehend the essence of the Vedas. How do Mahãtmas speak? What does the Vedas say? The Vedas will never claim anything as Its own opinion on any subject matter. But say, “Brahmavãdino vadanti!”- one who has realized Brahman says so. But, what do the ‘Brahman realized’ Mahãtmas say? They say, “The Vedas say so!”

Great ones like Adi Sankara lived in this country. Could he not have declared in his writings that they were his own opinion? Would not his words been believed by us? But such great Mahãtmãs have never claimed any compliment for their writings/words but have said it was based on the Sruti (‘Sruti pramãna’). Be it Ramanuja or Madhwachãrya. All Mahãtmas have written their ‘Grantas’ only with the Sruti as the base. Not only these Mahãtmas who came later, down the ages who have said so but also Valmiki whose Ramayãna is ‘ãdi kãvyam’ (the first epic) says, “Veda upabrahmanãrtãya”. This Ramayana has been born only to speak of that which the Vedas say. How does he say so? Vedas say, ‘matru devo bhava, pitru devo bhava, ãchãrya devo bhava, athiti devo bhava”. Look upon your mother, father, preceptor and the guest as verily God. The Vedas also say, “satyam vada, dharmam chara”. Speak the Truth and stand by the path of Dharma. The Vedas do not say speak Dharma but walk in the path of Dharma.

Matru devo bhava - look upon the mother as verily the Lord. Well! Has anyone been seen to live on these lines? It is for this that Rama-avatãra came to be! In Rama-avatãra, Rama adheres to every word of his mother Kausalya. He loves her deeply and holds her in high esteem. Whenever and wherever Rama sees his mother - be it inside the palace or on the streets, even if he were a Yuva-raja (the crown prince) he would at once prostrate to her. Pitru devo bhava - look upon the father as God - of this, there has been no doubt at all. Rama stands by the instructions of his father to the end. Satyam vada - speak the Truth - ‘asatyam’ (untruth) never was on the tongue of Rama. Moreover, anything that was uttered by Rama came to pass. As for ‘Dharma’, Rama’s life was proof enough. Rama tells Lakshmana, “There are only two things that I fear. One is adharma and the other is ‘paraloka’. If our life were to end with this world we need not fear anything or anyone. But it does not end just here. We move over to Paraloka where we have to explain our deeds performed here. None can escape this. One has to face the consequences of one’s deeds. There is no escape from this. It is these two - adharma and Paraloka - that I fear, Lakshmana”.

Matru devo bhava, pitru devo bhava, achãrya devo bhava, athiti devo bhava, Satyam vada, Dharmam chara - where does one find the explanation for these? No, not in the Vedas but in Ramayana! Rama has lived it all. Even in the case of fulfillment of Kaikeyi’s desires by his father Dasarata, Ramsa explains it was Truth (‘Satya’) that bound Dasarata. Dasarata, in keeping up the promise given to his wife Kaikeyi, had to fulfill her desires. “Dasarata was bound not by ‘kãma’ (desire for his wife) as others opine but by Satya”, says Rama. Thus, Ramayana depicts Rama’s ‘kãtinyam’ and ‘kãrunyam’.

When we take up epics such as Mahabharata or Bhãgavatam they contain innumerable sideline stories (‘upa kathas’). In Bhãgavatam we find Dhruva, Prahlada and Chitraketu stories. As for Mahabharata it is very well known for its umpteen number of interwoven stories. But in Ramayana there is only one and even that appears in the very beginning. In Ramayana, that is ‘ãdi kãvya’, Valmiki does not narrate any side stories but for just one and that is the story of Ahalya. The incident of lifting of the curse on Ahalya by Sri Rama. Even this appears at the very outset of Ramayana. Sage Vishwamitra who is leading the young Rama and Lakshmana speaks to them about Ahalya’s story and his (Rama’s) part in lifting the curse off Ahalya who had been cursed into a stone by her husband. This is the only ‘upa-katha’ in Ramayana. And Valimiki narrates even that at the very outset of Ramayana. Why should Valmiki include the liberation of Ahalya from the curse (‘Ahalya sãpa vimochana’) at the very beginning of Ramayana? There is a special reason attached to this. While speaking of Ahalya, the wife of a Maharishi (Gautama), Indra appears in the form of her husband. Here, Valmiki uses the words, “Devaraja kuthoohalãt”. So, it is very well known here that Ahalya was not taken unawares by the deceptive form of Indra. She was very much aware of who he was; in which case she had committed a grave sin, become impure and had lost her chastity. And by the sheer touch of the dust of His toenail Rama purified Ahalya. The same Rama later, instructs his wife, Sita, to enter into the fire (‘agni pravesh’) to prove her chastity! There were three strong witnesses to Sita’s chastity. One was Hanuman, the other was Vibhishana and the highest of all was the ‘hrudaya’ (heart) of Rama Himself. Yet, Rama asks Sita to prove her purity. The reason for the difference in attitude is, in the case of Sita it is ‘kãtinya’ and in Ahalya’s case it is ‘kãrunya’. Rama desired to stand in Dharma for the world to see. Rama lived for the world and never for himself. Rama’s face, even at this moment of great test, wears a smile (‘mandahãsa’). He does not feel agonised even at this grave moment. How does Sita respond to this call of Rama? What does Sita desire? She does not fret, “How could Rama instruct me to enter the fire (‘agni pravesh’) to prove my chastity?” Instead Sita feels, “Rama is a ‘Dharmãtma’, a ‘Satya santa’.” Sita competes with him in helping him stand in the path of Dharma and Satya. She does not grieve over Rama sending her away to the forest; over Rama’s demand to perform ‘agni pravesh’. She is very careful that her behaviour does not in any way bring a black mark on the character of her Prabhu. She stands by him in upholding Dharma and Satya. She hardens her heart (‘kãtinya’) to match Rama’s spirit. Such is the avatãr of Piratti (Sita). Later on in their life, Rama sends Sita away to the forest because of a dhobi pointing his finger at Rama. When Sita is brought back, Rama does not ask her to perform ‘agni pravesh’. This is for the mere reason that Rama felt the pulse of the people who would deem it as some gimmick. These days we do find some ‘swamijis’ who light a fire, get into it and come out with some idols! People may refuse to accept this way of (‘agni pravesh’) proving Sita’s chastity. So, here what does Rama do? A great scholar (‘vidwan’) will never accept a fool as a scholar even at the cost of his head! Will a highly learned person (‘shastragnya’) accept a fool to be a scholar? No, never! Will he prostrate to a fool, even if ordered to? No, never! In the same way, a Jnãni will never accept an ‘ajnãni’ as a Jnãni. Similarly, will a ‘pativrata stree’ (a chaste woman) accept one who is not a ‘pativarata’? Will she perform ‘pãda puja’ (wash the feet) to one who is not a ‘pativrata’? No, she will not. Therefore, here Rama calls upon such great ‘pativratas’ as Savitri, Nalãyini to perform ‘pãda puja’ to Sita. By this ‘pãda puja’ Sita’s chastity is proved. In the second incident Rama proves the chastity of Sita in this manner.

Sita’s avatãra is one which lends a marvelous support to Rama-avatãr. That is why it is said ‘Sitayãm charitam mahat’! This is not the ‘charitra’ (life history) of Rama but of Sita.

But one may question, “In Sundara kãnda Sita laments - ‘Rama I am calling out your name. My life is at its end. Many a king will offer the hands of his daughter to you. Marry someone and be happy!’ - how then can you say that Sita never felt grieved?” That was only lament of a human. It is entirely different. Even Rama who leaves for the forest to adhere to his father’s instructions (‘pitru vãkya paripãlan’) laments in many a place. He expresses his grief to Lakshmana, “Oh! Lakshmana! My father has deserted me!” These are only the grumblings of a human mind. But how does the ‘hrudaya’ feel? It wants to stand by the words of the father; to stand by the words of the mother; to stand by the path of Dharma and Satya. Similarly, the ‘hrudaya’ of Sita yearns to match Rama. The son of a great scholar is very careful not to bring any bad name to his father. He is very cautious, as any wrong step taken by him would make the world point its finger at his father, “Look at the behaviour of the son of such a great scholar”. Likewise, Sita feels, “Rama’s Dharma or charitra should in no way be affected by my behaviour”. She competes to match Rama’s qualities. Sita’s ‘chãritram’ is of such glory. Here, therefore, Valimiki explains the difference in the attitude of Rama. The same Rama who purifies a woman, who had lost her chastity, with just his toenail dust puts his chaste wife Sita to grave tests. In the case of Ahalya it was compassion (‘kãrunya’) and in the case of Sita it was exercising dharma majestically (‘kãtinya’). The former matter was that of another whereas the latter (Sita) was his personal matter. In others’ case Rama was full of compassion. If a man who had committed sins approached him he would forgive him. But, he himself would not commit mistakes. If a man who did not stand in Dharma or Truth felt guilty about it and sought refuge, Rama would out of empathy forgive him. But destroy he would the one who pretends to stand by Truth. He always forgave one who felt remorseful about the sins committed and desired to transform. What was Rama’s tãtparya? Wherever there was a fault, it should be set right. Injustice should be properly dealt with. This was the very purpose of God’s avatãr. Kamsa was a tyrant and Bhagavãn destroyed him. Rama destroys the asuras while in Dandakãranya. But one who weighs the pros and cons of fighting injustice is a spineless man, indeed. Without any such reservation we should speak of dharma, of satya- no matter what the consequences be. One should fight injustice whatever loss he may have to face. Rama-avatãr was one such avatãr (‘kãtinya avatãr’). Valimiki, thus spoke of the matters of Vedas in Ramayana.

‘Veda upabrahmanãrtãya’ - Matru devo bhava, pitru devo bhava, Dharmam chara - has anyone been seen to stand by the words of his mother and father? Has anyone been seen to live by Dharma even in times of trials and tribulations? Yes! There has been! Therefore, Veda bhãshya is not the real bhãshya of the Vedas but it is the Ramayana that forms the true bhãshya of the Vedas! Ramayana contains all that have been spoken by the Vedas - ‘Veda upabrahmanãrtãya!’ Thus speak the Mahãns. "

To be continued......

Next >

Home • e-MM • Contact

Radhe Krishna