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

Oppiliappan List Archive: Message 00263 Jul 2004

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


SRIMATHE RAMANUJAYA NAMAHA.

Dhyaanam:-
? Anbu, aazhiyaanai aNugu ennum,
naa, avan than paNbu, aazhi, thoL paravi yetthu ennum,
munbu voozhi kaaNaanai-k-kaaN ennum kaN,
sevi kEL ennum
pooNaram poondan pughzh.?  (Poigaiaazhwaar)

Dear devotees,
Kindly excuse me for interfering in the discussion on
Piratti?s agni pravesham at this stage, for if I
don?t, I would  be committing an offence of not
speaking up when it was my mail which was the cause of
the round of discussions currently taking place and
not what Sri Sadagopan Iyengar has thought (that Sri
Narasimhan?s salvo was a sequel to his write up). Mr
Narasimhan sent a cc of his  mail to me on this issue
as a sequel to my post ?An open letter to Sri Rama?
apparently in a bid to ?educate? me on the kinds of
?dosham? that Sita Piratti had, but missed in the
process the perspective which I wished the reader to
see ?the perspective being ? ?Rama can not be faulted
for any mis-demeanor, so also Sita. When Rama (as
Vishnu in avathara krama) had apparently intended to
place Himself and Piratti  in such worst conditions,
what was the need to do so? Why didn?t He do it by
some other way that could have spared themselves,
particularly Sita of the hardships they had to
undergo?? 

But the discussion has gone far beyond as to make the
moderator of one of the groups openly react to a
devotee?s request and suspend all discussion. Instead
he could have laid down guidelines for the discussion
to continue, the most important guideline being not to
attribute any dhosham or apacharam or mis-conduct to
the divine couple. The discussion is necessary to
sharpen our understanding of Lord?s mind and leela
better.

 At times God Himself gives us clues about what he
thinks are His goals of a particular avathara. For
instance in Parasurama gharva-bhangam, SriRama makes
an observation (unprovoked) that absolves Parsurama of
any kind of accusation such as jiva-himsa or  giving
up the swadharma of a brahmin. Rama says that as a
valiant son, Parasurama has been right for having
wiped out the kshatriyas in revenge. By this God
implies that what is perceived by ordinary mortals
need not / may not be the same as what God has had in
mind. This makes it all the more inevitable for us to
look keenly for clues in the puranas or in other
pramanas to know what God intends to tell us. Bhakti
is one thing and it is the very basic thing in
meditation on God. But discussions like these and
bhakti are not self-contradictory. We need be worried
whether we are violating the tenets of bhakti by these
discussions. 

Ramanuja says, ? The term bhakti signifies a
particular kind of love (preethi). Love is a
particular kind of congnition.? But ?the means for the
attainment of Brahman is para bhakti, which is of the
nature of meditation that has become an object of
supreme attachment (to the meditator) and has acquired
the vividness of clearest perception. This para bhakti
is to be attained through the path way of devotion,
which in turn is aided by one?s performance of his
duties after a due understanding of the nature of
reality through the scripture.? (Vedartha sangraha,
Verse 238). It is with this in mind that Ramanuja held
 the  inquiry into Brahma sutras as the foremost duty
to the seeker. When we indulge in such search and
re-search, we come to get a better grasp of what we
must do and what we must not do. This once again
energises us to search higher and at some stage He
decides ?buddhi yogam dadaami? (Gitachaaryan). The
?peru vidaai? (parama bhakti) that comes from knowing
Him takes the chethana to ?anthamil pErinbam? is what
Azhwars have shown as the pathway of devotion. For all
this, the very basis is bhakti and for the bhaktan, it
is inquiry into sruti and puranas. The aazhwars have
under gone this process. (Refer Acharya hridhayam for
the saamyam Aazhwar enjoys with Sita.) And we the very
ordinary mortals who are still at the kindergarten
level are ?just drawn? into this search which is a
very appropriate development to happen to us at this
stage. So instead of putting curbs, we must ask
ourselves whether we are proceeding in the right
direction and follow the right tools.

As followers of Bhagavad Ramanuja, it is only
appropriate to follow the Theory of Knowledge of
Ramanuja which is based on Religious Experience
(Bhakti), metaphysics and ethics  and employ the 6
pramanas laid down by him namely, Prathyaksha
(perception), Anumana (inference / reasoning), Shabda
(testimony), Upamana (comparison), Arthabdhi
(assumptions) and Anupalabdhi (non- apprehension). 

When we base our discussion within the parameters of
these rules, emotions are likely to run high. A
devotee writing as a sequel to my post (apparently)
said that emotions should not be there while reading
puranas. I think it is precisely to evoke our emotions
and provoke the seeker that elders have made it
mandatory for us to know the puranas. The Ithihasas
are capable of rousing our emotions to such a level as
to make us experience even the incidents connected
with the emotions. That is why our elders have
forbidden us to read them at home (barring sundara
khandam and a few other select chapters) and read them
instead within the premises of the temple. (A more
detailed and substantive discussion on moolavars could
have helped us to understand the implication of this.)

It is the emotion that one picks up while reading
Piratti?s  dhukkham and ?kadaral?  -?what dhosham do I
have that Rama had not yet come to save me? 
What paapam did I do in my previous birth that I have
to suffer like this?
Why Rama has not yet come to relieve me?? etc
(1) prepares  the chethana at the lowest level of
understanding to empathise with Piratti and console
himself that his ordeal is not as bad as what Sita
underwent and trains him to  look at good and bad in
life with equanimity. (when Piratti Herself has
underwent so much suffering, my suffering is not
something big. I can certainly  manage ?this is the
message directed at a majority of us who are finding
it difficult to cope with sufferings of life. ?van
siraiyil van vaikkil? ?NDP)
(2) reveals to those chethanas having a higher level
of grasp of bhagawan?s leela that He will wait and
watch ONLY TILL we reach the breaking point, but
before that happens he would certainly do the right
thing for us - as how rushed to save Draupathi though
He waited till the moment she stopped believing
herself, how He had Hanuman interfere when Janaki lost
all hopes and prepared to commit suicide. Let me
borrow the idea from Paapanasam Shivan who says why
God does like this. ?Sodhanai theeyil sphutahmiduvAn;
irangi thooki eduthu Anadam aLitthiduvaan?. He does
subject each one of us to agni pravesham ?just to make
us glow with virtues. In spite of all this suffering,
if we stand the ordeal, then comes the third level.
(3) The chethana thinks of nothing but Him and His
arrival  to release the chethana from suffering.
(refer Acharya Hridhayam ? 125 &126, P.B.
Annagraracharyar vyakhyanam). When like Sita, the
chethana is completely immersed in thoughts of Him
waiting for him as  a saviour, He too thinks about the
chethana like how Rama was completely immersed in
thoughts of Sita. The perfect ?chemistry? works then
and the chethana is at the verge of attaining
?release?. Even then the Lord holds out the Final test
for everyone to see that this chethana is indeed the
perfect candidate to live with Him in Parama padam.

The above reading based on interpretations of elders
in the form of Swapadesam does not answer the doubts
that we at the present juncture have.
The problem with us is that  we read / interpret the 
words as they are. If Sita laments what dhosham she
has, we take it in the literal sense and try to figure
out what dhosham she has!! If she wonders what
apacharam she has done, we immediately look for
apacharams ? both bhagavad and bhagavada. If one
thinks that there indeed exists instances in Ramayana
that denote dhosham or apacharam on the part of Sita,
it is said that any inquiry such as this must based on
the stipulated rules and assumptions (like in science)
laid down by none other than Ramanuja.

He recognises 2 steps in Prathyaksha (perception), the
first one based on perception of form and structure
(herein the outward meaning of Sita?s lamentation) and
the second, the kind of perception which is the
product of discriminative activity (vikalpa) based on
the other pramanas. (Eg ? understanding the expression
?village on the Ganga? in V.S ?verse  179)
The shabda ?based inference has it that Sri is
?ishwarIm sarva bhoothanaam? (SrI sookhtham) and that
?She is all-pervading even as Vishnu is all-pervading?
(Vi.Pu) and puts her on equal footing with Him (v.s.
217) Whatever attributes that He has, She also has is
what we have as Testimony. When He is born as a Deva,
She too is born as a Deva. If He is born as a human
being, She too is born as a human being. If He is all
righteousness personified, She too is all
righteousness personified. If He can not be otherwise,
she too can not be otherwise. Therefore to proceed
with the assumption that Sita is culpable of dhosham
or committing apacharam itself is fallacious.

Elsewhere Sita wonders whether it is  vidhi (destiny)
that is making her suffer. We find Hanuman also making
such statements in Sundara khandam. But we take this
reference to destiny as being the cause of  Sita?s
suffering with a pinch of salt because of our
conviction (supported by scriptures) that destiny and
karma do not bind the divine couple. But that a
similar conviction with reference to ?pure? qualities
of them and that they are just incapable of doing any
unrighteous thing is something we have missed, really
unfortunate and shows how limited, hypocritical and
choosy we tend to become.

The question then comes how to explain the so-called
?dhosham and apacharam?, the evidence for which is
found in Ramayana itself. 
To explain this we base our understanding by combining
the two steps of perception.
The only kind of apacharam that Sita herself speaks of
is what she tells Hanuman about her goading of Rama
before going on vana vasa in a bid to make Rama take
her along with Him. It is to be noted that she doesn?t
think about this when she was lamenting in isolation
in the Ashoka vana but only when she sends the message
through Hanuman. It is to be interpreted as a scuffle
between the divine couple where we have no place to
sit on judgement. It happens in our life too and we
know that the children in no way interfere in the kind
of altercation such as this taking place between the
parents. 

If it be still be said that Sita in the mortal form
has committed this Bhagavad apacharam, it is to be
noted that Bhagvan is one (from Sita?s refrain in
kaakasura vriddhantham, sarga 38, sundara khandam) who
believes ?en adiyaar kuttram cheyyaar. Appadi
chaithaalum adu kuttramaai eraadu? and accepts the
adiyaar. Sita as one will be seen as devoid of any
?kuttram? by Rama. Therefore the question of bhagavad
apacharam is simply non-existent.

The other sin according to some is the bhagavada
apacharam supposedly done by Sita to Lakshmana.
Whatever altercation that has  happened between the
two when Rama went after Mareecha and when Sita
commanded Lakshmana to make agni, it is something like
what happens between the mother and the son. Sita?s
very first query about Lakshmana proves this. As
mother in her capacity as ?manni?, Sita?s actions do
not attract any apacharam.

To make a better understanding that the idea of
dhosham or apacharam on the part of Sita is just non
?existent, we resort to another tool namely,
anupalabdhi or non-apprehension. Non-apprehension of
something (in this context, non-apprehension of
Piratti?s  Nir-dhosha qualities) is subject to error
in perception, wherein the first level of perception
alone is taken into consideration without taking into
account the second level which is necessary to arrive
at the correct judgement of perception. This must be
read along with Arthabdhi (assumption) based on
Shabda.

For example when we say that stars are not found in
the day, it is anupalabdhi  based on the arthabdhi
that it is due to the luminosity of the sun. But if we
say that stars do not exist in the day we will be
committing an error. Non-apprehension of something,
according to Ramanuja must be analysed along with the
knowledge whether the non-apprehended thing exited in
the past (just before non-apprehension) and in the
future. Non-apprehension of Piratti?s ?pure? qualities
without taking reference from what She was before and
after the given instance will lead us to arrive at a
fallacious statement which is what has happened in the
various altercations on this subject. 

In a similar vein Rama can not be attributed with
being un-righteous  to Sita while being righteous as a
ruler etc, when he asked for agni-parIksha. Simply
because Rama can not be wrong  as how Sita can not be!
To understand this, let us employ the first pramana,
Perception.
Just a reading of Sita?s very first enquiry about
kshEma-lAbham of Rama and others is sufficient. 
(sargam 36) It is here a wonderful tattwa of
sthreethwa is at its glowing best. After making
enquiries about Rama and others (in just 10 verses),
Sita?s main concern is about how Rama is braving the
loss of Sita (which runs into many verses) ?Does he
still think about me? Does he pray to God to get me
back soon? Does he make all steps at his disposal to
reach to me? Does he still remember me, the one who is
in a far away land? Has the purva snEham between us
undergone any change? Is he worried about me, sad and
afraid about the conditions I am in? .. (After all her
queries about whether Rama thinks only about her and
nothing else, she concludes ) Can anyone, be his
mother whose love for him has no bounds or his father
who died due to  separation from him or the other
relatives be a match to me in HIS HEART??

I consider this as the clue to unravel the truth
behind the issue under discussion. This is sthreethwa
at its best which only a sthree can understand. The
love for her husband is so intense that it is the
basis of pathi vradha dharma. Just prior to the entry
of Hanuman we find her despairing that Rama would
complete his vana vasam without finding her out and go
back to Ayodhya, have Rajyabhishekam and be happy with
other ?women?. This worry about whether the husband
has forgotten the wife or still thinks about her with
unwavering and unbroken love is the core part of
sthreethwa and the complete faith that the wife gets
to hold by virtue of experiencing the unalloyed love
of the husband (samsleshatthil dharikkai,
vislEshatthil dhariaamai) makes her a pathi-vradhai
whereby she would be ready to undergo sufferings of
any kind and to any extent just to uphold the honour
of the husband which in fact is a shared 
responsibility of the two. Sita would have undergone
agni-pravesham with absolutely no qualms or regrets or
even without Rama having to tell her because if it is
by that she can uphold Rama?s honour, which she would
be happy to do! There is no question of one commanding
the other to do a specific act for the sake of a
shared responsibility of the two. If we accept this
line of thinking, even the banishment in Uttara
khandam will not be seen objectionable. That this line
of reasoning is the most plausible one can be proved
by the fact that of all the different dharmas that
Rama came to establish, the one as Eka patni vradhan
is the foremost. Whenever we think of the purpose of
Rama avathara, we don?t even think of Ravana vadam or
pitru-vakhya paripalanam  etc but about  Rama as
Eka-patni vradhan. Throughout  Ramayana, Rama stands
as an embodiment of this virtue even as Sita stands as
a purushakara bhoothai with qualities such as anayarha
seshatwam. Rama  is the Eka-patni vradhan for the
chethanas too who think of Him and nobody else and who
wait for union with Him with the life-long ?kadaral?
-?koovikkoLLum kaalam innum kurugaadO?. God also
undergoes the pangs of separation from the chethanas
and longs to join this chethana ? a fact that can be
cross-checked with Gitacharyan?s  longing,
?Bahoonaam janmaanade gyanavaanmaam prapathyathe/
Vasudeva: sarvam ithi sa  mahathma sudhurlabha//?
(7-19)

Let me now move on to my prime vishanam that I
expressed in the Open letter to Rama ? why God
conceived a script such as the one in Ramavathara.
Since both are possessed of same kind of divine
qualities, it is worthwhile to know who among the two
decided the script. To know this we must understand
the ?relationship? or ?equation? between the two. (How
words are inadequate to express this idea!! Or is it
to do with my inadequacy by way of lack of command of
language? (sigh))

Taking Ramanuja?s words as pramana (V.S.  217), Sita
or Sri is the mother of the Universe, is eternal and
knows no separation from Vishnu. (Jhanardhan and
Vishnu are synonyms, says 159, V.S. whereby we assume 
that Vishnu as mentioned here is Supreme.) If it be
said that She is one with Him, how does one understand
the injunction, ?Being alone, all this was in the
beginning, one only, without a second.? (Chand ?VI ?
II).

To clarify this, it is said that Sita as Sri, though
said to have originated during the churning of the
milky ocean, must have existed even before that, from
the Beginning in or as part of the ?one only without a
second?. The ?one only? does not negate Her union in
Him at that time, as the ?one only? speaks of causal
condition of the Supreme, so says Ramanuja in B.S.

But then how to substantiate that She existed in Him
at that Time? We refer to the injunctions, which speak
about ?will? as in ?It willed that It may become many?
and ?Thought? as in ?It thought ? May I become
manyfold and be born? (chand) are of the nature of Sri
without whose existence / insistence, the Supreme does
not contemplate to do anything.

The Will or the Thought are part of Him which for
simpler understanding are said to be seated in His
manas. Ramanuja acknowledges this in his dhyaana sloka
to Sri Bhashyam to Vedanta sutras thus :- ? May my
understanding  assume the form of loving devotion to
the Highest Brahman who is the Home of Lakshmi.? The
implication that He will not do anything without being
told by Lakshmi is further authenticated by
Purvacharyas. (EvaL purushakaaramaanaalalathu,
Ishwaran kaaryam cheyyaan ) (samsleshatthil Ishwaranai
thirutthum ? iruvaraiyum upadesatthaal thirutthum ?
Ishwaranai azhagaalE thirutthum)

It is therefore concluded that Piratti as the Will or
Thought-force of the lord is the one who actually aids
Him in His actions. Connecting this to my vishanam why
Rama made a script such as the one He used in
Ramavathara, it is said that it She, not He who is
responsible for such a  script. Imagining a samvAdham
between the two in pAr-kadal before they finalised the
story line, it can be said with cent percent surity
that Piratti as the Will of Lord dominated the writing
of the story. 

If it be said that Sita has been at the receiving end
of Rama?s unjust treatment (?), it can not be so
because it is she who decided to have such treatment!!
Can a ?victim? who voluntarily wants to look like a
victim, be a victim? 

If it be said that Sita is culpable of dhoshams of
sorts (?), it can not be so. Because can any one
deciding to take a role that seems (note- ?seems?) to
have dhosham be attributed with that dhosham? Based on
this derivation, let me attempt to see how SriRama
could have written His reply to my open letter.
Here it is :-)

REPLY FROM SRIRAMA TO MY OPEN LETTER.

Dear Sow Jayasree,
AsIrvAdham.
I have forwarded your mail to your thaayaar, Sita
Piratti. 
Everyone of you think that I am a Swathanthran. But I
only know how much sathanthram I enjoy with your
thaayaar beside me. Lokatthil sthreegaL purushargaLAi
aatti vaippadu patri unakku solla thevai illai. It is
something like what you mean when you say, ?It is not
enough that justice is done, but justice is seen to be
done?. Your thaayaar makes it appear that I do my
functions as a swathanthran whereas it is she who is
behind all that I do. I have many astras which are
capable of piercing through 14 lokas. But your thaayar
has just one astra called ?kaN asaippu? with which she
binds me effectively. 

You don?t know the power of kaNNasaippu. Un thaayaar
kaNNasaippil kaariyatthai sadhitthu-k-koLvaL. Whether
it is about gifting her jewels to sage Sooyagyar
before we set out for the forest or about gifting her
hAram to Hanuman, it is her kaNNasaippu that makes me
look as though I am a swathanthran or the deciding
authority.

Even now she has given me a long list of
recommendations and if I don?t take action
immediately, she would be there before me to get her
wish fulfilled. She would go to any extent to prove
her point, even to the extent of hardships that she
planned for herself in Ramavathara.

Unakku theriyaadu kuzhandhe, Jayasree, how I felt when
I had to mouth those words for agni-parIksha. My heart
was screaming, ?Hey, Sithe, ennai indha ikkattil
maatti viittaayE?. I also felt that the script for her
was a bit exaggerated. I suggested that she tone down
her dialogue, with the apprehension that some of our
children at some point of time may take them in their
face value and start thinking of mis-demeanors on her
part. But instead of accepting my suggestion, your
thaayaar suggested that I take up some blame on my
part to compensate for it and scripted the
vaali-vadham in the way that it was finally enacted.
What can I do about it? 

Actually I have no time to write more. I have to rush
to take action on her recommendations before she hands
me over another list. InimEl un paadu, un thaayaar
paadu. Ennai aaLAi vidu.

KshEmam.
Your loving father,
Sri(Sita)Raman.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Concluding prayer:-
?ManushyaaNaam sahasrEshu kaschidhyathathi siddhayE/
Yathathaamapi siddhaanaam kaschin maam vEththi
thathvatha://
(B-G ? 7-3)
Hey Ram, Lead me in the right path?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Yahoo! Domains - Claim yours for only $14.70
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Z1wmxD/DREIAA/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